Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mindflayer (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. (non-admin closure) -- Lord Roem (talk) 05:37, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Mindflayer (band)

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

Non-notable band fails to meet WP:GNG / WP:BAND. No reliable sources cited or in Google News or Nexis. -- Wikipedical (talk) 03:35, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - There was nothing I can find. Corn cheese (talk) 04:21, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This band passes WP:GNG and criterion 1 of WP:NBAND ([1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]), and criterion 6 (members include Mat Brinkman and Brian Chippendale as was pointed out when the article was deprodded. So what's with this nomination? --Michig (talk) 06:24, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:16, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Meets WP:MUSICBIO on points #1 (independent coverage) and #6 (notable members), as Michig points out. — sparklism ^hey! 10:45, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Michig. The sources identified demonstrate that the subject meets WP:GNG and WP:BAND. Gongshow ^Talk 16:43, 16 October 2012 (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.