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 Keep (non-admin closure) sufficient sources to demonstrate notability have been uncovered, all delete votes were made prior to Michig's presentation of sources. Consensus is that those sources along with the ones in the article demonstrate notability per WP:MUSIC #1. Icewedge (talk) 04:28, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Agonist[edit]

The Agonist (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Fails WP:MUSIC. SummerPhD (talk) 14:11, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. The customary standard of two releases on major labels does not seem to be fulfilled. Stifle (talk) 14:16, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 16:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. —Eastmain (talk) 16:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. I added some references. Passes WP:MUSIC on other grounds, including extensive media coverage, national touring, and having at least one individually notable member, Alissa White-Gluz. Note that passing any of WP:MUSIC's criteria or the general notability guideline is enough to establish notability. -- Eastmain (talk) 16:49, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Re notability of Alissa White-Gluz: I don't see it. Her article is sourced to youtube, myspace and the record label's site. At the moment, her article's AfD seems to be heading toward a delete, or a redirect to the band's article. - SummerPhD (talk) 17:10, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: This one is tough. So far there is only one release on one of the more notable indy metal labels so the band do not meet criteria Criteria for musicians and ensembles, criteria number 5 yet. Because of the singer being a contestant on Canadian Idol there is a perceived notability going on that might help the band squeak by Criteria for musicians and ensembles, criteria number 6, however outside of Canada and outside of bloggers and message boards there is not much coverage as the singer did not go that far in the competition. I can find sources that are not allowed per Criteria for musicians and ensembles, criteria number 1, except, such as press releases and reprints of press releases, bios, user submitted news and trivial mentions of the band on blogs because of Canadian Idol, but not any articles on the band as a whole that would come across as "Significant coverage" as defined at the general notability guidelines. Soundvisions1 (talk) 18:06, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The band passes WP:MUSIC based on coverage. This allmusic bio is perhaps too short to be classed as significant coverage, but this allmusic review certainly is, as is this MTV article (already referenced in the article) as is this article from the Montreal Mirror and possibly these from The Gauntlet [1], [2], and this from Dutch site blastbeat (translated here). Significant coverage in multiple reliable sources constitutes notability and appears to be easily satisfied here. Two releases on significant labels is only one criteria that would indicate notability, and failing one of the criteria of WP:MUSIC is not an indication that a band is not notable.--Michig (talk) 19:18, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, passes WP:MUSIC with the ref's Michig found.  Esradekan Gibb  ^"Talk" 22:39, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - newly uncovered sources demonstrate notability the usual way. No reason to not follow precedent. WilyD 23:39, 14 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Living people-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 21:24, 16 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• I've added one more reference as well. The band meets the WP:MUSIC criterion #1 requirements. Keep. Paul Erik ^{(talk)(contribs)} 05:40, 18 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Two releases on major labels is not an absolute minimum requirement for a band to have a Wikipedia article; it's one criterion among several which may be met. And by the looks of this article as written, the band does meet others on that list. Keep. Bearcat (talk) 16:49, 18 November 2008 (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.