Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghost Mice (2nd nomination)

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 merge to Chris Clavin. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:49, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ghost Mice

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

Non-notable band; lacks significant coverage in independent reliable sources, failing WP:BAND / WP:GNG. Previous AFD in 2005, while WP:BAND was being developed. -- Wikipedical (talk) 03:38, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Lepricavark (talk) 05:44, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Chris Clavin. Some coverage found, e.g. [1], [2], but not enough to justify an article. More detail in the Clavin article wouldn't hurt. --Michig (talk) 09:34, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Content should be merged with Chris Clavin, if at all. A week or so ago another Chris Clavin side project also popped up in AfD, and my investigation at the time led me to question if the Clavin article—which has been around since 2005 when we had very lax standards for sources— even deserves being on wikipedia, considering it, too, lacks credible sources. Clearly he's an enterprising person who knows how to create an online presence, but I can’t tell if he has any genuinely notable accomplishment beyond existence in the DIY punk scene and his own promotional hype. He’s gotten a few trivial mentions here or there. But every endeavor he has been involved with seems the very definition of “small time,” and no claims on either his page or his multiple other ones are backed up with significant independent sources. ShelbyMarion (talk) 18:41, 8 January 2017 (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.