Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Icebird (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 keep. Since the article was improved, nobody has challenged the current state. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 10:52, 22 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Icebird (band)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:BAND. No reliable sources; the only one given is a link to their website. ~Hiddenstranger (talk) 10:27, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 11:16, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Funny, their music is definitely a thing but there's absolutely zero coverage out there I could turn up. Fails WP:BAND; WP:GNG; WP:BASIC Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:04, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just noting that there was a link to a review of one of the band's albums from Prefix Magazine, an RS, in the article at the time of nomination, which leads me to suggest that the WP:BEFORE work of the prior commenters may not have been thorough. Chubbles (talk) 14:21, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I did not, as I am sure the nom did not, consider that sufficient to pass the notability guidelines. Not really a WP:BEFORE issue. Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:30, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Reliable sources added.
Keep Sources provided since above discussion sufficient to demonstrate WP:MUSIC passage. Chubbles (talk) 05:56, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom . the sources are very funny . No significant coverege on RS : i see No evidence of Notability Samat lib (talk) 18:35, 2 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Evidence of notability is present in RS provided. HiroRanku (talk) 05:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment SPA Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 09:37, 3 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:16, 7 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as references have been added to the article such as Prefix Magazine and Time Out that have independent critical reviews of the band's albums and together constitute a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:04, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nosebagbear (talk) 22:48, 14 June 2021 (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.