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. Cbrown1023 talk 01:48, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Kory and the fireflies[edit]

I am a strong inclusionist, but by everyone else's standards this band is non-notable (673 Google hits). That wouldn't be so bad in and of itself, but the article is so terribly formatted, nothing links to it and even the article's name doesn't adhere to the manual of style.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 11:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I am regularly impressed when noticing how often people see the word "bottom" and read "top". Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 11:52, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Other than that, delete. Non-notable band. The image is not only a copyright violation but also overall crappy. Jobjörn (Talk ° contribs) 11:53, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete I'm a bit torn on this one: the article claims plenty of notability, including being the supporting act for major artists, and several national singles. However, I'm not seeing sources to back up the best parts, and their record label according to the article, "Sirwin Music Group", gets no Google hits at all, hardly a good sign. I'd be happy to change my vote if the claims in the article are sourced. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 14:21, 21 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete many claims of notability, but as already mentioned, abosolutely no evidence through reliable sources for these claims. Nuttah68 11:56, 26 February 2007 (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.