Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Totenmond

: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. There is a strong enough consensus to delete the article. Nakon 01:35, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

=[[Totenmond]]=

:{{la|Totenmond}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [https://tools.wmflabs.org/jackbot/snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Totenmond Stats])

:({{Find sources AFD|Totenmond}})

PROD was removed by {{U|Michig}} with saying that having ten albums with Massacre Records would satisy bands notability guidelines but I'm still questionable about that, as it could simply be that any available coverage is archived but that's an "if" of course", and since my searches found no better coverage and there are no obvious signs of there being any....here we are at AfD. Notifying past user {{U|Drmies}} in case he had any comments at the time. SwisterTwister talk 20:20, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 20:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. SwisterTwister talk 20:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

I hate the circularity in NBAND. A band is notable if it released a few albums on a notable label, and a label is notable if it has a couple of notable bands under contract--it's the closest thing to a walled garden we have on Wikipedia. So strictly speaking Michig is right, I suppose, but it leads to a ton of articles where we have nothing to write an article with, nothing reliable, but we can't delete it. Case in point: Creepmime, which lacks any verified content. And their 1993 album is boring, by the way. Drmies (talk) 21:21, 10 December 2015 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Bushranger _{One ping only} 07:39, 17 December 2015 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 04:58, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

Comment - I sincerely hope this can be relisted again as I was notified one heavy metal fan user is planning to comment here. SwisterTwister talk 19:58, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Relisting comment: Third relist per nominator's request. Mz7 (talk) 03:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 03:58, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Delete While it might meet WP:BAND by the letter, just putting out a few albums that received a few comments at the time and no longer seem to generate any interest doesn't seem to meet the stated goal of Wikipedia notability. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 14:30, 4 January 2016 (UTC)

Weak Delete - I think there might be a language barrier in play, but we need sources to write an article regardless of any technical claim to notability. If we don't have enough of them, even if it's notable there shouldn't be a stand-alone article. Sort of a WP:TNT. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 01:26, 9 January 2016 (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.