Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anonymus (band)

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 no consensus to delete this material. The challenge was that the article subject was not notable; the debate has found significant coverage in one reliable source, and has failed to reach consensus. One reliable source is one too few, so I would have no objection to an early renomination to AfD.—S Marshall T/C 11:53, 15 October 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Anonymus (band)

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

I just don't think this band is notable. The article doesn't assert much. See related AfD discussion at Stress (album) D O N D E groovily Talk to me 05:07, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Other then WP:ITEXISTS I can't see anything that denotes notability. I don't see where it passes WP:BAND with any WP:RS to back it up. - Pmedema (talk) 05:32, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 07:11, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Band appears to satisfy criterion 1 of WP:BAND to some extent, although there is some difficulty in assessing the sources, being as they are in French. See for example here Catfish Jim and the soapdish (talk) 11:31, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, the intro to that article Catfish Jim pointed to, in English, is: "The celebrated group, Anonymus, one of the pillars of heavy metal in Quebec, celebrate their 20th anniversary this year, and a successful tour of the province. The members, accompanied for the occasion by their original singer, Marco Calliari, will be stopping at the Bar la Bavaroise in Nicolet on September 21." D O N D E groovily Talk to me 13:17, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You could also go HERE for the english translation. I personally don't think that it satisfies criterion 1 of WP:BAND to the point of inclusion. Pmedema (talk) 03:27, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, I see it has been the subject of secondary source coverage. -- Cirt (talk) 00:38, 15 October 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.