Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deichkind
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. Band shown to be notable, and a lack of references is no reason to delete anything. --Stephanie talk 14:48, 5 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Deichkind
This article seems to fail WP:MUSIC. It certainly offers no WP:RS so there is no way to verify notability JodyB talk 21:03, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, no claim to notability and fails teh WP:BAND. tomasz. 21:24, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Delete, Per WP:BAND. --Random Say it here! 22:51, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Deichkind is, or at least was at the time of their best-known singles, a very famous band in Germany. Their songs were in the rotation of every major radio station as well as MTV Germany and VIVA. Komm schon, Limit and, most of all, Bon Voyage were hits in Germany. I can't find the charts positions (#34 in Switzerland, I'm sure it was higher in Germany), but ghits include reliable notability indicators like laut.de. Malc82 23:05, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
- Comment If that's the case, then perhaps you will add the required reliable sources before this AfD completes. The article itself must be sourced; it's not sufficient for you to think it's notable. It must be sourced. That's an absolute. JodyB talk 16:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Please note that I didn't contribute anything to this article, maybe you should ask the editor for RS (especially English-language ones). I don't know why you didn't contact him/her in the first place. It is not mandatory to reference every argument in an AfD, as you should know. NB: A quick check of WP:EQ might be good, too. Malc82 17:43, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment All I am saying is that there must be some way to verify that this article is noteworthy. Our policy is at WP:V and says in part The burden of evidence lies with the editor who adds or restores material. Material that is challenged or likely to be challenged needs a reliable source, which should be cited in the article. Quotations should also be attributed. If an article topic has no reliable, third-party sources, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. I simply challenged the article as being notable and thought that if you were familiar with the subject you could source it. I'm not asking you to do anything I haven't done myself. Please be assured, I have no interest in this article one way or another. If it can be sourced and verified, then let's keep it. I'm not sure what you mean about referencing every argument in an AfD. I never asked for such and certainly don't expect it. Why don't we get on with editing the Wikipedia. If you can improve the article, please do. I cannot. Thanks JodyB talk 22:15, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment. There are no WP:EQ issues here. tomasz. 22:23, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I found a source stating that Bon Voyage topped at #11 in Germany and their best album (Noch Fünf Minuten Mutti) was #17 [1] but it's not a RS by WP guidelines. The problem is that older German chart results aren't available for free. The (German) laut.de source already included is actually a pretty good one, but I couldn't find anything in English (which isn't that surprising, since the band is known for their satirical lyrics and thus all the good chart results were in German-speaking countries). On the other hand I'm not a hip hop fan and maybe just don't know where to search for the sources. Malc82 22:40, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Reply Please note that I didn't contribute anything to this article, maybe you should ask the editor for RS (especially English-language ones). I don't know why you didn't contact him/her in the first place. It is not mandatory to reference every argument in an AfD, as you should know. NB: A quick check of WP:EQ might be good, too. Malc82 17:43, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Comment If that's the case, then perhaps you will add the required reliable sources before this AfD completes. The article itself must be sourced; it's not sufficient for you to think it's notable. It must be sourced. That's an absolute. JodyB talk 16:54, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 14:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, has an article in two other Wikipedia's, and there are plenty of google hits. John Vandenberg 14:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
- Keep per John. It seems notable, google results are fine. Needs some verification though, not deletion G1ggy! Review me! 23:28, 4 June 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.
