Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crackfiller
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 of the debate was Delete, after discounting an invalid vote. Deathphoenix ʕ 23:57, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Crackfiller
Is this notable - methinks not.... Benjaminstewart05 17:15, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
me thinks your pronoun usuage needs a little work. This is rather notable considering the band recently recieved a record deal and have a single coming out shortly. Boomboombanana 17:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
Actually methinks you will find it is a real word, check the dictionary. Benjaminstewart05 18:08, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Normally I'd say clean-up but as the band and song title seems to recieve only two hits and both of those are their myspace account - well..... --Charlesknight 17:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Appears to fail WP:BAND I think Homestarmy 18:10, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete Joeyramoney 19:19, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. When/if their record is released, and when/if people actually buy it, it may be suitable. Not yet. Fan1967 21:31, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete - Does not meet WP:MUSIC. --Joelmills 01:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep- Marginally meets WP:BAND. ref: "Is cited in notable and verifiable sources as being influential in style, technique, repertory or teaching in a particular music genre. Has been a significant musical influence on a musician or composer that qualifies for the above list. Has established a tradition or school in a particular genre. Has composed a number of melodies, tunes or standards used in a notable genre, or tradition or school within a notable genre. Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture. " Possibly because I'm a member of their locality.Article needs work, however. ClarkyMacFarly 04:08, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- This user's only edits are to their userpage and this AfD.
*Delete- Be that as it may, the article is devestatingly incomplete, there's no proof evident for your claims.ElliottSmithlove 04:30, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep-Just read through WP:BAND in complete, if someone can come up with more elaboration centering around the Rap-Rock genre and their local contribution then this could simply be a clean-up. ElliottSmithlove 04:34, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- This user's only edits are to their userpage and this AfD.
-am i allowed to defend myself for that claim? I came upon this and felt up for a good free speech skirmish. never used wiki. before and figured this would be a great place to start.ElliottSmithlove 04:47, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
-
- If they are notable because of their influence on the local scene - what can you offer in the way of sources? I still can find Zippo, nil, nothing. --Charlesknight 11:29, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, but Cleanup Verifiable sources need to be cited, but I will second the statements of ClarkyMacFarly and .ElliottSmithlove. Parsssseltongue 18:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Where are those verifiable sources likely to come from? The ONLY mention of them on the website is two myspace pages - both of which belong to the band. One seem to a flyer for their big gig - which seems to be in their house..... --Charlesknight 19:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Publications devoted to a notable sub-culture and multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media that may not have an online presence or just haven't been cited yet. I am not familiar with this group, but that doesn't mean there isn't press coverage about them. Parsssseltongue 19:14, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- No verifiable sources have been cited, or even mentioned. Wikipedia policy is not satisfied by the possibility that there might be articles about them that aren't on line. Burden of proof is on the proponent of the article to provide verification. Fan1967 19:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I believe the nomination was not made in good faith, considering the article was submitted for deletion a mere two minutes after its creation. I am not saying articles do not need notable subjects or verifiable data, merely that not every editor new to Wikipedia has their articles completed before they post it. This article should have been tagged with a notability notice, and more time should have been given. Yes, the editor has had time now to pull together resources, but I wonder if they were scared off having been bitten so quickly. Parsssseltongue 20:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- None of which is relevant to the fact that there is absolutely nothing to support any notability for this group. You don't get a free pass to keep a page on your unknown band just because someone nominated it too quickly. Fan1967 20:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Not my band, not neccessarily the band of the editor who originated the article, either. And again, I stress that there may be a wealth of material to support notability for this band, and YES, the editor needs to provide it. But I want to add my voice to the record, and that voice is saying, TWO MINUTES?! Parsssseltongue 20:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- And there's still three more days to find any "wealth of material" that may exist. If you really think there is reason to keep it, I suggest you start looking for it. Based on what I can find on this group, and what I can't find, it looks like the editor who tagged it in two minutes was right. Fan1967 21:06, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- No need to be snippy, and I have other articles I am working on, so NO, I'm not going to research on Crackfiller. I am merely pointing out my viewpoints on my vote. Parsssseltongue 21:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude. I hate to say it but sometimes, with articles like this, two minutes is enough. That's long enough to try a google search, find nothing but myspace.com, and draw some conclusions. Fan1967 22:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Okay, thank you. :) Parsssseltongue 22:20, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Sorry, I didn't mean to be rude. I hate to say it but sometimes, with articles like this, two minutes is enough. That's long enough to try a google search, find nothing but myspace.com, and draw some conclusions. Fan1967 22:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Not my band, not neccessarily the band of the editor who originated the article, either. And again, I stress that there may be a wealth of material to support notability for this band, and YES, the editor needs to provide it. But I want to add my voice to the record, and that voice is saying, TWO MINUTES?! Parsssseltongue 20:59, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- None of which is relevant to the fact that there is absolutely nothing to support any notability for this group. You don't get a free pass to keep a page on your unknown band just because someone nominated it too quickly. Fan1967 20:48, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- I believe the nomination was not made in good faith, considering the article was submitted for deletion a mere two minutes after its creation. I am not saying articles do not need notable subjects or verifiable data, merely that not every editor new to Wikipedia has their articles completed before they post it. This article should have been tagged with a notability notice, and more time should have been given. Yes, the editor has had time now to pull together resources, but I wonder if they were scared off having been bitten so quickly. Parsssseltongue 20:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- No verifiable sources have been cited, or even mentioned. Wikipedia policy is not satisfied by the possibility that there might be articles about them that aren't on line. Burden of proof is on the proponent of the article to provide verification. Fan1967 19:21, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
- Publications devoted to a notable sub-culture and multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media that may not have an online presence or just haven't been cited yet. I am not familiar with this group, but that doesn't mean there isn't press coverage about them. Parsssseltongue 19:14, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Where are those verifiable sources likely to come from? The ONLY mention of them on the website is two myspace pages - both of which belong to the band. One seem to a flyer for their big gig - which seems to be in their house..... --Charlesknight 19:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete The article asserts absolutely no notability, and it has no references. Even if somebody tried to assert significance, I think they'd fail to be able to do so. -- Kicking222 20:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- The nominating editor gave the originator of the article a mere two minutes to even try. (Check the history times marked of the creation of the article, and then the subsequent nomination for deletion). Parsssseltongue 21:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete When their first album comes out they can be assessed if it is a hit; but as of now non-notable. BlueValour 23:48, 23 June 2006 (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.
