Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Our Mercury
- 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. No comments after 2 relists,
]Our Mercury
- Our Mercury (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
- From Below (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Article about a band, with no strong claim to passing
WP:ROUTINE "what's on at the clubs tonight" concert listings, not substantive coverage. As for AllMusic, while it would assist notability if they had deemed the album worthy of a review, the mere presence of a tracklist-only directory entry is not an automatic notability freebie since they try as much as possible to maintain at least that type of page for every album that exists. (And since Library and Archives Canada also tries as much as possible to keep a copy of every sound recording made in Canada at all, having directory entries there isn't an automatic notability pass either.)
So literally all we've really got here for notability-building sources is the Exclaim! review, and that's just not enough by itself — and since the band's been defunct for a decade, there's no realistic prospect of better sourcing emerging in the future. I'm also bundling the one album that has a separate standalone article, as it makes no credible claim of notability either. Bearcat (talk) 16:32, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
]
So literally all we've really got here for notability-building sources is the Exclaim! review, and that's just not enough by itself — and since the band's been defunct for a decade, there's no realistic prospect of better sourcing emerging in the future. I'm also bundling the one album that has a separate standalone article, as it makes no credible claim of notability either. Bearcat (talk) 16:32, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:37, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:38, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - TheMagnificentist 12:18, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, - TheMagnificentist 12:18, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —
Help! 01:24, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
]- 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.