Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sex Ant Toys

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 Delete. —Quarl ^(talk) 2007-02-18 08:53Z

Sex Ant Toys

Minor band. 21 Google hits. Article does not assert nobility. References given are mostly (all?) to self-published sites such as blogs. No reliable sources are provided. Johntex\^talk 20:52, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts: {{subst:spa|username}}; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}}.

Delete Fails WP:BAND. Doesn't assert notability. Chairman S. Talk ^Contribs 20:59, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per nom. Fails WP:MUSIC, does not cite reliable sources. Dan, the CowMan 21:51, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing WP:MUSIC in general, WP:BAND in particular. 20 google hits is fairly evident. Dåvid Fuchs ^{(talk / frog blast the vent core!)} 23:46, 13 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: fails an awful lot of things, I smell WP:COI, not a lot of Google hits at all, and more. x42bn6 Talk 00:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete All the so-called references are the bands' own materials. SubSeven 04:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This article can not be deleted under Wikipedian Common Law. Arguments regarding the use of Google as a mean of determining how well known an article is should never be the only criteria for deletion. The information found in this article about the band Sex Ant Toys speaks the truth under good faith and can be verified through reliable published sources including, but not limted to Apple iTunes Music Store, Recording Industry Association of America, Magazines/Publications, Miss Mabry (a sublabel of Vuela Music with registered trademark in the US Patent & Trademark Office) and the official website of Sex Ant Toys. This article contains useful and resouceful information in regards to Sex Ant Toys as the market approaches the release date of their first upcoming album through major digital download stores like iTunes, Naptser, Sony Connect, Rhapsody, Zune, and Musicnet among others across the world. Sex Ant Toys is a new act signed by a major music download distribution channel under the label of Miss Mabry. I urge Wikipedia to take action in regards to this matter on behalf of the new music community that promotes the use of new mediums of communication and the new music revolution. This article for deletion should debated under all given circumstances before it is deleted. We are now taking full responsability regarding this matter: editing the information and sourcing its content with reliable references. Thanks Void Sat News 08:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some of the contributors stating that the Sex Ant Toys page has no credibility, like David Fuchs Dåvid Fuchs, [[1]] have been condemned, banned and charged before by Wikipedia for abuse, libel, and block/ban evasion. The use of abusive sock puppets on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited and illegal within the Wikipedia Editors Community. We are here not to act as Police in search of who's who in doing and trying to delete our material. We have also confirmed through other sources other than Wikipedia, that the band Sex Ant Toys has been in an A&R pursuit from entities in the music industry. People are trying to vandalize their content in Wikipedia. Action for KEEPING THIS ARTICLE SHOULD BE TAKEN. The Sex Ant Toys page must be approved under the common laws of Wikipedia.Void Sat News 08:52, 14 February 2007 (UTC) — Void Sat News (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]

Actually, that was a vandalized version of his userpage. David Fuchs is an established Wikipedian. You also have yet to provide evidence of any reliable sources that I requested. For future reference, there are no laws on Wikipedia. We have guidelines and policies, but we mostly run on consensus, and the consensus so far is to deleted. ShadowHalo 10:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I'm afraid you're mistaken there. An anonymous IP vandalised David Fuchs' userpage by adding the appropriate templates (the same anonymous IP did the same to Jimbo Wales' page minutes later[2]). Any editor can use the templates, but their use doesn't automatically mean the targeted user is guilty of any wrongdoing. And please don't resort to ad hominem attacks to try and make your point. An article should be kept or deleted on its strength, relevance, notability, verifiability and so on, not on who has contributed to or commented about it. ~Matticus ^T_C 10:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For the record: Yes, my page was vandalized, and yes, I've also been blocked twice, I think, due to IP vandalism (when I'm editing on school comps or my little bro is annoying). You're right, google hits shouldn't be the method for requiring stuff, but they are often telling: for instance if all the links are to the bands myspace page, lack of third-party etc. is apparently a concern. Dåvid Fuchs ^{(talk / frog blast the vent core!)} 17:05, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Article should not be deleted. John Black MA 09:12, 14 February 2007 (UTC) — John Black MA (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. [reply]
It's generally helpful if you provide a reason why you believe an article should be kept or deleted. ShadowHalo 10:38, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reliable sources, fails WP:V as well as WP:MUSIC. One Night In Hackney 10:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per the verifiability policy, due to the lack of independent sources. Does not seem to meet WP:MUSIC criteria, either. -- The Anome 11:56, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
~~Keep~~ I am only interested in keeping this article alive, not the who's who of wikipdia, we are currently updating the content with new sources under good faith. Allow us no more than 2 business days to complete with reliable sources and references. BEST REGARDS, Void Sat News 12:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Void Sat News has already !voted above. One Night In Hackney 12:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: One of your references links back to Wikipedia making this reference extremely doubtful. x42bn6 Talk 17:11, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Additionally, the beginning of the “Pre Sex Ant Toys” section has been directly copied from MySpace, and may be considered a WP:COPYVIO. Dan, the CowMan 17:25, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I am currently working on this article and looking for valid sources for its content, thanks a lot for your concern. Pia Watson 21:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I suggest you "userfy" the page by moving the relevant copy with to your userpage. This wasy you will have a copy in case the article gets deleted while you are looking for references. Later, if reliable sources can be found, it will be easier for you to make a new article. Johntex\^talk 22:28, 14 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: This article is not suitable for an encyclopedia. Tomer T 13:20, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I know, I know, I am currently working on the new page with real sources through my user page. Everything will be edited to perfection with reliable sources by tomorrow. We are speeding the process through All Music Guide... We have to do this as we approach to RELEASE DATE. The Miss Mabry brand was registered today as a trademark through US PATENT & TRADEMARK OFFICE. Its officially a LABEL not a SUB-LABEL under Vuela Music. Regards and thanks a lot for your help and tips. Its really been of great knowledge for us and fun too.Pia Watson 17:33, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: If "we" refers to the people who are creating and editing the article and you are also working with or in the band, it falls under WP:COI, and this is highly discouraged. Also note that patenting doesn't make a band notable. x42bn6 Talk 17:51, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: "We" as on behalf because I've been an avid follower of their work. Thanks for stating your remarks. It really is helping me understand the whole philosophy and information flow under Wikipedia. Can I encourage other people to do so? Pia Watson 18:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Why AM I getting italics? Pia Watson 18:42, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  - Italics were caused by using two single quotes '' instead of a double quote ". I fixed it for you. Johntex\^talk 18:49, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Since this is likely to be deleted, you would neet to take it to Wikipedia:Deletion review before reposting the page. This process works, for instance see Talk:Cancer_Bats under "Article Milestones". Dan, the CowMan 18:59, 15 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: When contemplating Notability, note that "The barometer of notability is whether people independent of the subject itself (or of its manufacturer, creator, author, inventor, or vendor) have actually considered the subject notable enough that they have written and published non-trivial works of their own that focus upon it." (See "Note 2") Dan, the CowMan 07:42, 16 February 2007 (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.