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 no consensus with leave to speedy renominate. Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:01, 5 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Traveling Circle[edit]

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

I've checked, and cannot myself find sufficient evidence of notability in the coverage of this band by reliable sources, though there is limited coverage. Epeefleche (talk) 05:43, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 23:35, 15 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:08, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I believe this article meets the wikipedia criteria on at least two points:

1. The band is on an independant record label existing more than a few years - Nasoni Records has existed for 15 years:

http://www.nasoni-records.com/about.html

2. They have also been writen about beyond their own promotional materials:

http://www.theaquarian.com/2010/12/15/traveling-circle-handmade-house/ http://mratavist.wordpress.com/2011/02/15/traveling-circle-comes-around-interview/ http://mratavist.wordpress.com/2011/01/20/traveling-circle-handmade-house/ http://wine-women-song.blogspot.com/2010/10/handmade-house-by-traveling-circle.html http://sonyudum.blogspot.com/2010/10/gunun-parcas-traveling-circle-note-rops.html http://concreteweb.be/reviews/reviews_2010/reviews_29_09_2010/CD/traveling_circle/cdtraveling_circle.html http://www.kreetik.com/1/post/2010/09/interview-with-joshua-schultz-of-traveling-circle.html%20

I believe more articles are available. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 165.125.144.131 (talk) 15:59, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

1. Your # 1 above does not appear to be sufficient, as wp's requirement in this context is that the band have released two or more albums (this band only has released one album). Also, the albums have to have been released on a major label or on one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a roster of performers, many of whom are notable); but we don't have to determine whether the label here is one of the more important indie labels, as the band has not released the requisite number of albums to be considered notable under this criterion.

2. As to your # 2 above, we need substantial RS coverage, such as multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the band; which of those sources do you feel qualify as reliable sources independent of the band, per wikipedia's criteria? Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 06:35, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - T P 02:33, 29 May 2011 (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.