Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skitzo Metal

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. NAC. Joe Chill (talk) 21:51, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Non-notable band, my speedy delete was removed despite there being no claims of notability. Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 22:49, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just a comment on the speedy -- to avoid A7 there only need to be claims of importance, and multiple releases on multiple labels are usually seen to be a good faith claim of importance. The band may well not be notable, but that's a different issue.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:54, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak keep Google News turns up a few sources like this, all from the Santa Rosa Press-Democrat. The band seems to be more notable for throwing up than anything else. By the way, is this a recreation of Skitzo (band)? Shubinator (talk) 23:48, 9 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:57, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 19:46, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per the sources found by Shubinator. I also found this entry in Google Books, which shows that there was a documentary about this band. There is enough coverage to allow Skitzo Metal to pass WP:N. Cunard (talk) 20:13, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Theleftorium 20:40, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - A great example of an article which needs to be improved not deleted! Francium12 (talk) 20:48, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree, so I have cleaned up, expanded, and referenced the article. Cunard (talk) 21:15, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, with a plate of chocolate chip cookies for Cunard for the cleanup and sourcing. (But please don't imitate the band after you eat them...)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:21, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• If I could gain wiki-fame and attract large crowds of editors streaming onto my contributions to watch me barf up the contents of my ramblings, I would definitely imitate this band. I would have scores of minions who would correct my every mistake. They would prevent me from getting indef-blocked for violating WP:BLP; no more insulting a professor who is an infant. Too bad ... :P Cunard (talk) 21:47, 22 August 2009 (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.