Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pomegranates (band)

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 04:12, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pomegranates (band)

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

May not meet WP:Notability and looks like it is just WP:Promotion. Has no references. PhantomTech (talk) 03:54, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I cannot find where the group meets any criteria listed at WP:BAND. Fails per WP:NMG. Stubbleboy 06:12, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 06:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. ★☆ DUCKISPEANUTBUTTER☆★ 06:16, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep One_of_Us_(Pomegranates_Album) shows that independent sources have reviewed their albums, which is a likely sign of notability. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 07:03, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. There are a few sources out there that meet WP:BAND, not least a biography and two reviews from Allmusic. The band also released two albums on Lujo Records and one on Afternoon Records, which look like fairly 'important' labels. — sparklism ^hey! 08:46, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've added one source to the article, so there are no longer "no references". — sparklism ^hey! 08:50, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per the above statements, and Metacritic lists ten sources which review the band's work. Subject meets WP:GNG and WP:BAND. Gong show 20:10, 30 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep based on the sources found by Sparklism and Gongshow, and as noted by me. Allmusic is considered a good enough source here, and 'major minor' indie labels are often notable. The review at The Phoenix is especially telling in its significant coverage in this well-respected indie weekly. Bearian (talk) 21:15, 4 February 2013 (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.