241:. It would appear from the references given that the band has received a lot of press coverage but most of the references are user submitted content, unremarkable blogs, or reprints of the band's own press releases. In general the references aren't what they seem to be. Take the ref ""Dethcentrik Video Banned By YouTube". MetalCrawler.net. 2011." for instance. No where in the linked review is any mention of YouTube. Some of them, such as the KBPI and Web of Metal contain no information related to the band. The Web of Metal page and the page linked on MetalCrawler are both nothing more than a link to the review on Metal Storm. There just isn't anything in the article to establish notability. The article and its references establish that the band probably does exist but that's not the criterion for inclusion. -
215:(21 Aug 11) with only superficial changes. albums not on important label. band still lacks coverage in independent reliable sources. inclusion on a Terrorizer's sampler cd is not significant coverage. of the other multitude of references they are either trivial coverage (like the mtv listing), are press releases or are not reliable sources. nothing satisfying
440:
I fail to see how an inclusion on a free sampler cd and the cd's track listing with a short band description (with no signs of it being written by
Terrorizer) can be considered anything but trivial coverage. I also question the reliability of Metal Storm and do not call a cd review on such a webzine
455:
The article clearly states (to me) that it's not just that they were included in the sampler, but that they were discussed in an article in
Terrorizer. If that isn't true (I don't have access to the source), then that is a problem, though not necessarily a fatal one. On Metal Storm...again, I'm
425:
As I stated, the coverage in
Terrorizer and Metal Storm definitely count, and it's possible that the some of the other sources also count as reliable sources as well. I admit that this article is on the borderline, but I believe that there is just enough coverage to meet ] and thus be kept.
325:
Information intended for everyone notifies you as well, and despite explicitly being stated on the talk page that the article was ineligible for speedy deletion 6 days before you attempted speedy deletion, you tried anyway. I encourage any deleting admin to additionally check the article's
479:"We love a new genre over at Terrorizer and black horrormetal sounded right up our street on paper. Until We heard it. This Colorado noise machine churn out sickening aural audacity that will make you ejaculate blood from all orifices, simultaneously. Actually that
456:
coming at this without any knowledge of the field, and was relying on the fact that a review in a reliable source is generally considered to be a sign of notability (this is true not just for bands, but also for books, movies, etc). 07:45, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
283:
is a radio station, and airplay is another indicator of notability, while granted I might agree that not much information beyond a tracklisting, composer information, and information on what album the music is taken from is available on that particular site.
379:(both notable enough for their own articles on WP. Some of the others may be reliable (while I'm aware that much metal coverage is online rather than in print articles, I'm not entirely certain which ones are certainly RS), and if they are (specifically
307:
The albums were not released by IODA,they are only distributing it. KBPI is not national and there is no evidence of rotation. That sampler cd is not a notable compilation and the bands short blurb is not significant coverage by
Terrorizer.
255:: I urge any closing admin to check every single source for themselves, and to also read the article thoroughly. I would like the closing administrator to please take into consideration the following: Two albums on a major label are one of
292:
significant, not to mention the write-up on page 3. One of the authors on this deletion discussion tried to tag to page for speedy deletion as a re-post, despite notification from an administrator that is was not eligible.
237:: While this article is not identical to the one deleted, it appears to suffer from the same problems. Basically though there are plenty of sources cited, it does not actually establish notability in the ways described at
180:
212:
86:
81:
76:
405:
Which do you think constitute significant coverage in reliable, independent sources? Having a wikipedia article does not make a source reliable and does not make trivial listing significant coverage.
387:) then that further establishes notability. I'm not entirely certain if IODA qualifies as a major record label, though if someone with more music knowledge than me says it is, then this also meets
536:
489:
and is regularly included with the magazine, I would qualify inclusion as both a third part article, and inclusion in a notable compilation. On a slightly related note, the band is on
141:
510:. Of the three Pandora accepts the least music and Last.fm accepts the most music. That said, these stations are embedded in many newer radios, cars, and video game consoles.
441:
that wants everyone to send in their music for reviews to be significant coverage. I equate it with the local only type of coverage that is routinely dismissed at many afds.
174:
71:
473:
They give the track number on the compilation, the track time, the record label, the release the song is taken from, and a short review.
17:
459:
Terrorizer cd samplers are accompanied in the magazine by a page listing the bands and tracks on the cd with a short description.
114:
109:
594:
574:
550:
519:
468:
450:
435:
414:
400:
357:
343:
320:
302:
245:
228:
54:
391:. Overall, I believe that this article contains just enough information in reliable sources to qualify the band as notable.
118:
195:
348:
I missed that editors opinion on the talk page. I withdraw my statement above and apologise unreservedly for my mistake.
162:
101:
609:
36:
371:
Article meets GNG, by having coverage in multiple, reliable, independent sources. Specifically, the inclusion in
268:
608:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
590:
515:
339:
298:
276:
264:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
561:
due to complete lack of indepth coverage in independent third party sources. Note that when an article opens
156:
464:
446:
410:
353:
316:
224:
570:
334:
and discern for themselves whether any of the user's actions regarding this page are done in good faith.
152:
327:
105:
310:
As for your last lie, the editors opinion that it was not eligible for speedy came after the tagging.
49:
586:
511:
335:
294:
242:
202:
188:
582:
474:
460:
442:
431:
406:
396:
349:
331:
312:
220:
97:
60:
285:
256:
238:
216:
566:
565:
it's crediting the article as being written partly by the subject, thus it's not independent.
546:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
388:
288:
mentions "inclusion on a notable compilation album." So yes, inclusion on
Terrorizer's CD
168:
500:
493:
490:
427:
392:
542:
135:
497:
376:
372:
259:'s potential requirements for notability, and two releases are available via
507:
504:
563:
New York, NY (Top40 Charts/ Death
Incarnate Record) - A metal band ...
275:
has a long track record independent of simply being itself part of
602:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
280:
272:
260:
537:
list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions
131:
127:
123:
187:
330:
page, and to read all comments on this discussion by
201:
87:Articles for deletion/Dethcentrik (4th nomination)
82:Articles for deletion/Dethcentrik (3rd nomination)
77:Articles for deletion/Dethcentrik (2nd nomination)
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
612:). No further edits should be made to this page.
485:And since the compilation itself is entitled
8:
535:Note: This debate has been included in the
534:
69:
585:Hope that clears up some information
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
67:
501:link to Dethcentrik on iHeartRadio
24:
211:recreation of article deleted at
72:Articles for deletion/Dethcentrik
263:distribution, which is part of
508:link to Dethcentrik on Last.fm
494:link to Dethcentrik on Pandora
1:
595:23:30, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
575:01:32, 18 November 2011 (UTC)
551:14:43, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
520:16:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
469:07:55, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
451:07:25, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
436:04:53, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
415:22:22, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
401:13:14, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
358:07:19, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
344:23:27, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
321:22:19, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
303:09:49, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
246:08:37, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
229:07:37, 14 November 2011 (UTC)
55:00:42, 23 November 2011 (UTC)
477:'s review for example reads:
583:Definition of a major label
629:
605:Please do not modify it.
265:Sony Music Entertainment
32:Please do not modify it.
66:AfDs for this article:
483:right up our street."
44:The result was
553:
540:
620:
607:
541:
206:
205:
191:
139:
121:
52:
34:
628:
627:
623:
622:
621:
619:
618:
617:
616:
610:deletion review
603:
148:
112:
96:
93:
91:
64:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
626:
624:
615:
614:
598:
597:
587:BusyWikipedian
577:
555:
554:
532:
531:
530:
529:
528:
527:
526:
525:
524:
523:
522:
512:BusyWikipedian
484:
478:
420:
419:
418:
417:
366:
365:
364:
363:
362:
361:
360:
336:BusyWikipedian
295:BusyWikipedian
249:
248:
243:Metal lunchbox
209:
208:
145:
92:
90:
89:
84:
79:
74:
68:
65:
63:
58:
51:Black Kite (t)
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
625:
613:
611:
606:
600:
599:
596:
592:
588:
584:
581:
578:
576:
572:
568:
564:
560:
557:
556:
552:
548:
544:
538:
533:
521:
517:
513:
509:
506:
502:
499:
495:
492:
488:
482:
476:
472:
471:
470:
466:
462:
461:duffbeerforme
458:
457:
454:
453:
452:
448:
444:
443:duffbeerforme
439:
438:
437:
433:
429:
424:
423:
422:
421:
416:
412:
408:
407:duffbeerforme
404:
403:
402:
398:
394:
390:
386:
382:
378:
374:
370:
367:
359:
355:
351:
350:duffbeerforme
347:
346:
345:
341:
337:
333:
332:Duffbeerforme
329:
324:
323:
322:
318:
314:
313:duffbeerforme
311:
306:
305:
304:
300:
296:
291:
287:
282:
278:
274:
270:
266:
262:
258:
254:
251:
250:
247:
244:
240:
236:
233:
232:
231:
230:
226:
222:
221:duffbeerforme
218:
214:
204:
200:
197:
194:
190:
186:
182:
179:
176:
173:
170:
167:
164:
161:
158:
154:
151:
150:Find sources:
146:
143:
137:
133:
129:
125:
120:
116:
111:
107:
103:
99:
95:
94:
88:
85:
83:
80:
78:
75:
73:
70:
62:
59:
57:
56:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
604:
601:
579:
567:Stuartyeates
562:
558:
486:
480:
384:
381:The Gauntlet
380:
368:
309:
289:
252:
234:
210:
198:
192:
184:
177:
171:
165:
159:
149:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
498:iHeartRadio
475:Dethcentrik
377:Metal Storm
175:free images
98:Dethcentrik
61:Dethcentrik
487:Fear Candy
373:Terrorizer
277:Sony Music
543:• Gene93k
385:Braingell
428:Qwyrxian
393:Qwyrxian
286:WP:Music
271:and the
257:WP:Music
239:WP:MUSIC
217:wp:music
142:View log
580:Comment
505:Last.fm
491:Pandora
389:WP:BAND
181:WP refs
169:scholar
115:protect
110:history
559:Delete
503:, and
235:Delete
153:Google
119:delete
196:JSTOR
157:books
136:views
128:watch
124:links
16:<
591:talk
571:talk
547:talk
516:talk
465:talk
447:talk
432:talk
411:talk
397:talk
383:and
375:and
369:Keep
354:talk
340:talk
328:Talk
317:talk
299:talk
281:KBPI
273:IODA
269:link
261:IODA
253:Keep
225:talk
189:FENS
163:news
132:logs
106:talk
102:edit
213:afd
203:TWL
140:– (
593:)
573:)
549:)
539:.
518:)
496:,
481:is
467:)
449:)
434:)
413:)
399:)
356:)
342:)
319:)
301:)
290:is
279:.
267::
227:)
219:.
183:)
134:|
130:|
126:|
122:|
117:|
113:|
108:|
104:|
48:.
589:(
569:(
545:(
514:(
463:(
445:(
430:(
409:(
395:(
352:(
338:(
315:(
297:(
223:(
207:)
199:·
193:·
185:·
178:·
172:·
166:·
160:·
155:(
147:(
144:)
138:)
100:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.