Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Poison Arrows

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) Ron Ritzman (talk) 13:50, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Poison Arrows

Delete fails

WP:BAND, speedy was declined because they claim to be signed to a blue-link label - enough to defeat a speedy deletion, but not sufficent to meet WP:BAND. Also, no sources, no context, not much of an article. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 16:08, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply

]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 16:33, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This needs some investigating. The press release says that the band has been "featured in a number of publications including Blender, XLR8R, Skyscraper, Maxim, Chicago Reader, Time Out Chicago, Rhapsody.com, Rcrdlbl.com, Ghetto Blaster, Livedaily.com, Popmatters.com, and Emusic.com". Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 16:58, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm struggling to find more info - one of their members, Pat Morris has a wikipedia entry already through being in Don Caballero, and they have connections to a lot of other blue link people - Che Arthur and atombombpocketknife for example. They have 3 releases listed at allmusic.com [1] but allmusic isnt always reliable. I'm sure there's more out there.....Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 17:31, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Passes
TheJazzDalek (talk) 17:57, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep , passes
WP:MUSIC#C1 as well; [2], [3], [4], [5]. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 01:17, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:04, 14 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Enough coverage exists to demonstrate notability. Here's coverage from PopMatters: [6], [7].--Michig (talk) 06:55, 14 April 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.