| Revision as of 16:28, 12 November 2006 editXoloz (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users16,915 edits →[]: closing (del. endorsed)← Previous edit | Revision as of 18:00, 12 November 2006 edit undoRyan Postlethwaite (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users28,432 edits →[]Next edit → | ||
| Line 26: | Line 26: | ||
| This page was deleted but no further comment was made after I tried to argue the case ] 00:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC) | This page was deleted but no further comment was made after I tried to argue the case ] 00:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
| *The article was first deleted after ]. When it was recreated, it was deleted per our ]. Criterion G4, recreation of deleted content, applied. The band is not (yet?) notable; it does not meet the notability guidelines set by ]. '''Endorse deletion''' without prejudice. ]] <sup>] to electro-pop ] from 1984.</sup> 16:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC) | *The article was first deleted after ]. When it was recreated, it was deleted per our ]. Criterion G4, recreation of deleted content, applied. The band is not (yet?) notable; it does not meet the notability guidelines set by ]. '''Endorse deletion''' without prejudice. ]] <sup>] to electro-pop ] from 1984.</sup> 16:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
| * |
*Post the article deletion, the wild beasts have recieved offers from XL records (Record label of ], ] and ])and Domino records (Record label of ] and ]) I feel that proves the band are notible. A page could represent the bands ability for future notibility and would be edited in that way upon undeletion. ] 00:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
| **Having received an offer isn't enough. Having the "ability for future notability" isn't enough. The key question is not whether they might one day become notable, but whether they already have. And it seems like they haven't. ]] <sup>] to electro-pop ] from 1984.</sup> 00:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC) | **Having received an offer isn't enough. Having the "ability for future notability" isn't enough. The key question is not whether they might one day become notable, but whether they already have. And it seems like they haven't. ]] <sup>] to electro-pop ] from 1984.</sup> 00:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 18:00, 12 November 2006
| < November 6 | November 8 > |
|---|
- Full reviews may be found in this page history. For a summary, see Misplaced Pages:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 November)
7 November 2006
Lost Planet of the Gods (Part 2)
Stub page deleted prematurely by proposal prior to additional content being added. BlueSquadronRaven 21:38, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- You may want to read the second paragraph at the top of the Misplaced Pages:Deletion review page (above): If a short stub was deleted for lack of content, and you wish to create a useful article on the same subject, you can be bold and do so. It is not necessary to have the original stub "undeleted". Fan-1967 23:33, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
Wild beasts
This page was deleted but no further comment was made after I tried to argue the case Ryanpostlethwaite 00:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- The article was first deleted after Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Wild beasts. When it was recreated, it was deleted per our criteria for speedy deletion. Criterion G4, recreation of deleted content, applied. The band is not (yet?) notable; it does not meet the notability guidelines set by WP:MUSIC. Endorse deletion without prejudice. Aecis 16:58, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
- Post the article deletion, the wild beasts have recieved offers from XL records (Record label of the white stripes, basement jaxx and dizee rascal)and Domino records (Record label of The Artic Monkeys and Franz Ferdinand) I feel that proves the band are notible. A page could represent the bands ability for future notibility and would be edited in that way upon undeletion. Ryanpostlethwaite 00:05, 12 November 2006 (UTC)
- Having received an offer isn't enough. Having the "ability for future notability" isn't enough. The key question is not whether they might one day become notable, but whether they already have. And it seems like they haven't. Aecis 00:07, 12 November 2006 (UTC)