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. Courcelles 00:12, 26 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tristeza (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article is an A7 band page, since there is no indication of importance and no sources provided that show any interviews or significant coverage of the band. Cannot nominate for A7 because somehow the article survived AfD before. So renominating. — Timneu22 · talk 12:18, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Improve through standard editing. A standard Google search doesn't show much because the name is also the English name of a citrus disease and is also a common word in Spanish and Portugese. Limiting the Google search to articles also containing either "band" or "music", excluding "citrus" and limiting to English works well. There is an abundance of sources showing notability. Many are behind pay walls but even the first paragraphs shown make it clear this band has received broad and deep coverage from reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 16:45, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If sources actually existed, I'd think they'd be in the article by now. — Timneu22 · talk 16:50, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • As we both know, Wikipedia is a work in progress. I am editing on a smart phone right now, and it is not practical for me to cut, paste and properly format references into the article at this time. I explained the Google parameters I used. The solution in this case is to reference and improve the article, not delete it. Cullen328 (talk) 17:46, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • The article is more than three years old. Still looks like A7. — Timneu22 · talk 17:59, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I've added a "critical reception" section with quotes from two reviews and a description of one of the guitarists, all from reliable sources. If this was truly an A7, it would be taken care of by an administrator, and be over with. Instead we are having a seven day AfD debate, and an opportunity for interested editors to improve the encyclopedia by adding to and improving this article, rather than deleting it. Cullen328 (talk) 21:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:09, 19 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Clearly passes WP:MUSIC. Releases on Better Looking Records, Gravity Records, etc., and plenty of media coverage. Also Restore all albums as they were illegitimately deleted via CSD A7 - Spine and Sensory, Dream Signals in Full Circles, Mania Phase, Mixed Signals, Espuma, A Colores, En Nuestro Desafio, and Paisajes. Chubbles (talk) 14:09, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Albums cannot be deleted as A7. I don't think what you're saying is correct. — Timneu22 · talk 14:12, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • All of these albums were speedily deleted yesterday, and the rationale given in the deletion summary is "A7". Chubbles (talk) 14:13, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Was it a9? If it was a7, then that really is a problem. — Timneu22 · talk 14:16, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • No, it was A7, and this is visible if you click on any of the above redlinks. A9 would still not apply, as there is a corresponding artist article. Chubbles (talk) 14:17, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • I brought this matter to WP:ANI: Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Albums deleted under A7. — Timneu22 · talk 14:26, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
            • Thanks; not used to seeing that kind of good faith around here... Chubbles (talk) 14:28, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Chubbles. If the band article is kept, I'll put the content of the album articles in your userspace so you can add more info/references before you move them back into mainspace. Elen of the Roads (talk) 15:59, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per there being enough sources for the band to pass WP:BAND, plus I added a reference to their Billboard Magazine bio. Whose Your Guy (talk) 17:20, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Notability claimed and (now) confirmed by multiple reliable sources. Thincat (talk) 18:02, 20 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep There are sufficient sources to establish notability. Dlabtot (talk) 16:43, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - due to sources found and added by others. Also, restore the albums if they were deleted inappropriately or fraudulently. If someone thinks the albums should be deleted they should use the correct process. --DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 20:19, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The album articles were just track listings, hence the offer to userfy and allow the creator to add a bit more info - stop them getting deleted again. Elen of the Roads (talk) 20:55, 21 December 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Snow Keep. Sufficient sources to establish notability.--Epeefleche (talk) 17:46, 24 December 2010 (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.