Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Junipers

:{{la|The Junipers}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Junipers Stats])

:({{Find sources|The Junipers}})

The group is not notable according to WP:BAND or WP:GNG. The was previously raised in 2009 on the talk page: Talk:The Junipers. The article is unverified, the proposed sources on the talk page are not reliable, independent secondary sources and fail to establish why the band is notable. WP:DEL#REASON 7. The subjects fits WP:GARAGE and doesn't seem to belong here at this time. N4 (talk) 13:43, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:18, 7 February 2014 (UTC)

• Weak keep. The Allmusic bio is fine as a source and indicates that the band received further coverage in magazines such as Uncut and Record Collector, and they also recorded sessions for BBC radio. --Michig (talk) 19:48, 7 February 2014 (UTC)
• Comment. The act of being on Allmusic does not make an act notable and neither does appearing on BBC radio- there are many BBC radio shows featuring largely non-notable musicians. The band does not meet criteria 2 - 10 of WP:BAND and makes no claim to meet criteria 11 or 12 either. As for the first criteria, they're sole claim consists of a review in Uncut and Record Collector, not a feature, a review which in the case of Uncut likely consists of a rating and a one-sentence summary. These are very trivial publications and do not establish notability. The bottom line is we have an article about a WP:GARAGE band that's been around for 14 years yet shows no media coverage in non-trivial sources in the first five pages of a google search for "The Junipers" or "The Junipers band". The article is poorly written (with a very high level of name dropping, as though to somehow elevate the subject beyond they're true notability) that, with a copy edit, would consist of very little content with a discernible purpose. Further to the verifiability issues, the page-starter and core content contributors are all inexperienced editors and possibly biased editors (WP:AUTOBIO). The band isn't notable. I don't see how you can argue otherwise. All the best. N4 (talk) 05:39, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

:*The Allmusic bio is not trivial, and until we find the coverage from Uncut and Record Collector we won't know whether that is trivial - there are some reviews reproduced at [https://www.facebook.com/notes/the-junipers/album-reviews-press/53215564637] - some are short but this is not trivial coverage. The band recorded a session for Marc Riley's BBC 6 Music show - sessions are not generally by non-notable artists. --Michig (talk) 06:53, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:25, 15 February 2014 (UTC)

---

---

:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:32, 22 February 2014 (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.