Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lucifugum

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Stifle (talk) 23:41, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lucifugum

Basically fails WP:MUSIC. There is a vague claim to notability (described as "a cult name in Ukrainian black metal" by Rockdetector) but that's nowhere near enough. One of their albums was re-released by the borderline notable Drakkar, but mostly their material is released through Propaganda which is a) definitely non-notable, and b) owned by the band. No significant third-party coverage; the only sources I could see were not reliable and hosted by the Propaganda website or another label that has released their records. Article has also been heavily edited by single purpose users that, whilst I'm assuming good faith, I expect to comment here. Happy to retract nom if non-trivial sources found, for instance, in Russian (a real possibility, though I tragically cannot read Russian). Blackmetalbaz (talk) 15:01, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I created this article around a year ago, according to Wikipedia Rule #5 of Criteria for musicians and ensembles:

"Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)". Lucifugum released 2 albums on major labels (Drakkar and Adipocere/Oaken Shield) and 2 albums on BlackMetal.Com, big indie label with many years history and many releases: http://www.blackmetal.com Resume: 4 albums on labels which correspond respective Wikipedia rules. Lucifugum article is in law. PLEASE REMOVE THIS DELITIION NOTE. p.s. If you're disagree with this: "a cult name in Ukrainian black metal", you can simply remove these words, but NOT the whole article. Lucifugum is a very notable band with many years history and many albums. --Black pauk1488 (talk) 09:37, 4 May 2009 (UTC)— Black pauk1488 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- J^mundo 15:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. -- J^mundo 15:37, 2 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think then that the discussion has to revolve around whether any of those record labels are in fact notable enough to satisfy criterion 5 of WP:MUSIC. None of them are in fact major labels, they're all indies. Drakkar Productions I suspect to be notable enough for Wikipedia standards. Oaken Shield is more dubious... Adipocere may just scrape notability, but Oaken Shield is in fact a sublabel that almost certainly wouldn't (I'm not sure what policy is concerning sublabels). Blackmetal.com fails roster criterion of "most [acts] are notable" by a country mile. I reiterate that no sources independent of the band (apart from the Rockdetector one that I added) have been provided to establish any other notability. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 12:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete... I agree with the nominator. The article has been tagged for forever (and those tags were even fought over) and it has not improved. The only source, Rockdetector, does not have enough credibility to sustain the claims made (and I just did another search, which came up with nothing), and while the editors keep telling everyone that we just don't know the scene there and they do (see the article's talk page), there is no evidence of that whatsoever. So it boils down to the records and the labels, and I agree with nominator that their notability falls on the other side of the notability guideline. BTW, that talk page does make for interesting reading. Drmies (talk) 19:32, 4 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, guys! I've made some changes on Lucifugum page. I deleted bio and emotions (cult and bla-bla-bla). There is just line-up and discography there. Just official data. Line-up everybody can see on official releases. These releases everybody can find/buy in many distros all over the world. --Black pauk1488 (talk) 00:38, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, with the current state of that page, it fails with WP:BAND completely.--Canniba loki 17:31, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Do not delete~~ I've added bio but without "cult status" claims. I suppose now everything's alright with this page.

--Black pauk1488 (talk) 18:07, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The SPA Black pauk1488 has removed the AfD notice (this is the second time this has happened). They have also "improved" the article by removing the only reliable source that was present in the article. Finally, in edit summaries, they repeat the inaccurate assertion that any of the labels to have released Lucifugum records are major labels; I suspect that they believe the phrase "major label" means that they are important. It does not. All are small independents. The repeated removal of AfD tags, and in the past notability and unreferenced tags, on this article is becoming a little disruptive. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 18:52, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Also, please do not !vote more than once. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 18:54, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Blackmetalbaz, you created the page for Diaboli. 1. This band is not more important and not more known than Lucifugum. 2. Notability of Diaboli has been established just by band bio, (written by band directrly, NOT by reliable source) and by Rockdetector. In this case I ask you: why do these sources ok for Diaboli and not ok for Lucifugum? Why do interview for a very small and very unknown label Sund and Moon is a reference for Diaboli? Why do Lucifugum interviews and Rockdetector bio not ok for Lucifugum page? 3. The situation with labels who released Diaboli albums is the same as with Lucifugum: just indie labels released Diaboli, NOT major. So I ask again: why do you want so much to delete Lucifugum page, if Diaboli page, made by you, the same “not reliable”? It’s not fair. Lucifugum is a very notable band, I insist, this page must be saved. Deletion = crime. --Black pauk1488 (talk) 19:28, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have replied to you specifically on your talk page. This comment is irrelevant to this AfD; please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 19:36, 9 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.