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. Tone 06:47, 18 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Shining (British band)[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable band! GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 21:40, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A user named Soul Crusher created lots of articles about obscure industrial metal/rock bands/albums this year. He only cites unreliable sources on all of his articles, while he claims these sources to be notable and he doesn't give a rationale why he thinks so. His talk page is full with warnings of his articles being deleted and other issues. His articles are so problematic that the whole case has been taken to WP:ANI. According to Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (the user who has taken the whole thing to WP:ANI), Soul Crusher started his WP activity back in 2006, but he stopped in 2016. This year he started writing again, and since then he is unstoppable, he has been spewing out a lot of non-notable bands and albums. Some of his album articles have already been deleted. Most of his pages are nominated for deletion, this one included, which is of course nominated by me. There are two notable bands named Shining: a Norwegian experimental jazz/metal band and a Swedish black metal band. But this Shining is, I am afraid, not notable. The sourcing is horrible - a blank Allmusic page, and various tribute albums to notable artists listed, also at Allmusic. None of these albums have staff reviews, just user-generated ones and most of them doesn't even have that, just a track listing. There is also a Discogs and a Musicbrainz page which does not establish any notability either. Allmusic is only reliable if the band page has a biography, and their albums are reviewed by staff. If the page only lists the band's discography and other trivial stuff like that, it is not reliable. Neither when the album page solely consists of a track listing and user reviews. I did a google search, found nothing reliable. So there are no Rs whatsoever. Their albums are also nominated for deletion. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 21:38, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 21:38, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 21:38, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - As noted by the nominator, you can read more on Soul Crusher's unsupported and highly questionable misdeeds at the incident investigation here. Soul Crusher is apparently a collector of underground industrial compilation CDs and saw the need to create Wikipedia articles on all those albums and the unknown bands within. This band is just another entry from that flood. This one seems to have some notice within the esoteric industrial rock community but almost nothing in the outside world. They can be discussed at scenester blogs, but this is supposed to be an encyclopedia of notable people and things. ––DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 22:29, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Doomsdayer520: Yeah, blogs are everything I found. Why can't Soul Crusher comprehend the fact that blogs, the homepage of the record labels of these bands, blank Allmusic pages and such are not reliable sources? GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 09:48, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:BAND. Myxomatosis57 (talk) 16:15, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A number of appearances on compilation albums put out by indie record labels, but no significant coverage of the band to be found. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per apt rationale by GhostDestroyer100. Celestina007 (talk) 05:36, 18 September 2020 (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.