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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 7 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No-Cash (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)

Procedural nomination. Original nom reopened the old one instead of creating new one. Original reason was:

Does not meet criteria for WP:Music. Note that the page was deleted previously in 2007 Wkharrisjr (talk) 21:08, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Shadowjams (talk) 21:30, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:45, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete the band's page as well as the Run Your Pockets album article. No coverage found in reliable sources; does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:BAND.  Gongshow ^Talk 17:50, 30 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete both per Gongshow. I was wondering why it wasn't lumped in. The article itself is a bloody mass of conjecture. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © 17:36, 5 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral on both. I've added a little to both articles, but WP:RS coverage is admittedly a bit thin. However, they were a real band, and they do have an audience--listening stats for Run Your Pockets at Last.fm are better than plenty of other albums in WP (trust me). --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 04:10, 6 May 2012 (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.