Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Barbie and the Kens
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 Keep -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 14:57, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Barbie and the Kens
Band has not been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable. which is the core notability requirement. I don't see any citation that the band had a hit on a national music chart. Article had previously been proposed for deletion in Aug 2006. I'm not sure if the undocumented claim that is in regular rotation on a retro internet-only radio station meets the requirement for notability but would be interested in what others have to say. Warfieldian 17:46, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Their song "Just a Gigolo" features on the KROQ Top 106.7 Songs of 1983 [1]. Catchpole 17:56, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Is "Their song" the Just a Gigolo (song) of 1929? SmokeyJoe 12:52, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Keep being no. 35 on a list of top 106(.7) songs in an age before Internet radio and MP3 is notable enough. Awyong J. M. Salleh 18:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- I know that WP:BAND is just a guideline, but the central notability requirement for this band has not been met. And reading the guidelines, the secondary qualifiers of being on a national music chart is only an indicator of the probable existence of "sufficient reliable information is available about a given group or individual musician." I don't see any reliable information in the article or available on the web that would lead me to think that this article would ever be anything more than a stub. Warfieldian 18:53, 25 February 2007 (UTC)
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Quarl (talk) 07:59, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- Very weak keep per the above comments, but it really needs sources – Qxz 15:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)
- 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.
