453:'s reliance on albums-with-a-major-label remains up-to-date; I'm not sure. Maybe it is. I wouldn't say that "number of fans is irrelevant", though. What if they had more fans than the Beatles but just chose not to record albums but instead put put videos and sell individual songs through downloads? I dunno. On the other hand their dead-tree media coverage seems nonexistent (although they do have some amount of online-zine coverage, which may not mean much). So they are pretty borderline in that sense. I mean, you have a point. My gut feeling is that they're probably notable enough to have an article, but it's hard to prove.
467:
What's the point of having a guideline if you don't follow it. If we were more dismissive with the guideline, we might as well let every Tom, Dick, and Harry get an article. I'm sorry, when it comes to notability, the aforementioned factors are irrelevant. They do not deserve an exception. It takes a
361:
marker of two albums on a major or important indie label. On the other hand, they sell their songs directly through amazon.com and itunes so they probably don't feel the need to have a label and an album. If it was 1982 they probably would have been signed by RCA Records or whomever by now. And they
324:
doesn't require a given sales level of 8-track tapes or 78 RPM records for an act to be notable, so maybe it's sufficiently up to date. Anyway, it appears that this duo has a lot of the markers that we generally associate with notable
186:
622:! Others-5: "Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture." They are prominent representatives of the YouTube subculture. Here's another article that calls them YouTube sensations:
92:
87:
82:
77:
256:
282:
per above. Also: all albums are self-produced and distributed by their own label. Majority of article is promotional, and majority of references are first-person (twitter, tumblr, etc.) --
147:
437:
I don't agree that all this is irrelevant. It's information. Whether it's useful information or not I can't say. But let's not say it's not information. It is. Regarding
180:
72:
332:
The have millions of fans, or hundreds of thousands of fans, or some large number of fans, however this is manifested and however difficult it is to count them.
348:
They are part of the music "scene" generally with bluelinked acts, hang out with them, appear on stage with them and in their songs and videos and so forth.
320:
is accurate anymore or needs to be dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st
Century. I don't know if that was ever decided. I do know that
243:
472:. If they did have that many fans, there would be media coverage on it. I don't see it as borderline. I see it as not worth the bytes.
17:
120:
115:
405:
It's cool "they probably don't feel the need to have a label and an album". That's part of the criteria to be in this encyclopedia.
124:
633:
604:
592:
576:
560:
543:
519:
482:
462:
432:
371:
304:
271:
247:
229:
55:
623:
107:
201:
168:
648:
36:
531:
per nom. I'm not even going to try and search for mentions on Yahoo! or Google because if they're YouTube artists: -->
629:
647:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
538:
162:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
532:
As well with common names like Megan and Liz, the chances of notable sources being found is second to none.
480:
430:
158:
625:
515:
458:
367:
295:
441:, it's a guideline, not a policy, and as such it proclaims at the top that "...it is best treated with
353:
And they seem to be sticking around, having been at this for about four years now. It's true that they
408:"If it was 1982 they probably would have been signed by RCA Records or whomever by now." Please read
208:
469:
409:
533:
194:
500:
450:
438:
419:
218:
474:
424:
224:
111:
619:
358:
336:
321:
317:
313:
267:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
601:
588:
573:
556:
511:
454:
363:
287:
52:
238:
only non-trivial source is local news coverage, everything else is YouTube, Facebook, etc.
174:
551:- passes WP:MUSIC, seems like wikipedia isnt up to speed with the whole Youtube era yet.--
312:, I guess. I dunno. There were discussions at the earlier AfD's and a discussion at the
468:
lot to get around this guideline. And to respond to the fans thing, your getting into
103:
61:
263:
449:
may apply". Does an exception apply here? Maybe. I've raised the question whether
141:
598:
584:
570:
552:
49:
422:. Also, please see how this act accomplishes none of the criteria. Thank you.
335:
They have had a regional tour in the United States. (This was once one of the
503:
to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
362:
have millions of YouTube hits. Whether that matters I don't know. Maybe.
342:
They have appeared on Oprah (albeit briefly and not as featured guests).
641:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
597:
It's not a matter of opinion. Which part of it does it pass?--
402:
How long they have been in the music industry is irrelevant
316:
talk page and so forth, the question being whether or not
257:
list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions
396:
Opening for a notable artist doesn't make them notable.
137:
133:
129:
193:
93:
Articles for deletion/Megan and Liz (5th nomination)
88:
Articles for deletion/Megan and Liz (4th nomination)
83:
Articles for deletion/Megan and Liz (3rd nomination)
78:
Articles for deletion/Megan and Liz (2nd nomination)
510:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
207:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
651:). No further edits should be made to this page.
8:
255:Note: This debate has been included in the
254:
70:
345:They have opened for bluelinked acts.
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
399:Who they hang out with is irrelevant
217:Simple YouTube artists. Do not meet
73:Articles for deletion/Megan and Liz
68:
24:
339:criteria but has been removed.)
1:
383:Number of fans is irrelevant.
569:But, it doesn't pass it...--
418:Please read the criteria at
415:YouTube hits are irrelevant.
668:
634:10:14, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
605:19:26, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
593:19:14, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
577:19:04, 4 August 2011 (UTC)
561:14:14, 3 August 2011 (UTC)
544:05:26, 2 August 2011 (UTC)
520:00:08, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
470:crystal ball hypotheticals
56:15:00, 9 August 2011 (UTC)
483:20:50, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
463:20:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
433:15:30, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
372:14:25, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
305:15:16, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
272:13:27, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
248:16:51, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
230:04:37, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
644:Please do not modify it.
618:I found where they pass
32:Please do not modify it.
386:Touring is irrelevant.
67:AfDs for this article:
447:occasional exceptions
357:have the traditional
476:I Help, When I Can.
426:I Help, When I Can.
225:I Help, When I Can.
583:I think it does.--
389:One appearance on
246:and a clue-bat •
44:The result was
522:
274:
260:
659:
646:
626:Moscowconnection
541:
536:
509:
505:
303:
302:
298:
292:
286:
261:
241:
240:Ten Pound Hammer
212:
211:
197:
145:
127:
34:
667:
666:
662:
661:
660:
658:
657:
656:
655:
649:deletion review
642:
539:
534:
498:
300:
296:
288:
284:
283:
239:
154:
118:
102:
99:
97:
65:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
665:
663:
654:
653:
637:
636:
612:
611:
610:
609:
608:
607:
580:
579:
564:
563:
546:
535:SwisterTwister
525:
524:
523:
507:
506:
495:
494:
493:
492:
491:
490:
489:
488:
487:
486:
485:
416:
413:
406:
403:
400:
397:
394:
393:is irrelevant.
387:
384:
375:
374:
351:
350:
349:
346:
343:
340:
333:
327:
326:
307:
276:
275:
251:
250:
215:
214:
151:
98:
96:
95:
90:
85:
80:
75:
69:
66:
64:
59:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
664:
652:
650:
645:
639:
638:
635:
631:
627:
624:
621:
617:
614:
613:
606:
603:
600:
596:
595:
594:
590:
586:
582:
581:
578:
575:
572:
568:
567:
566:
565:
562:
558:
554:
550:
547:
545:
542:
537:
530:
527:
526:
521:
517:
513:
508:
504:
502:
497:
496:
484:
481:
479:
478:
477:
471:
466:
465:
464:
460:
456:
452:
448:
444:
440:
436:
435:
434:
431:
429:
428:
427:
421:
417:
414:
411:
407:
404:
401:
398:
395:
392:
388:
385:
382:
381:
379:
378:
377:
376:
373:
369:
365:
360:
356:
352:
347:
344:
341:
338:
334:
331:
330:
329:
328:
323:
319:
315:
311:
308:
306:
299:
293:
291:
281:
278:
277:
273:
269:
265:
258:
253:
252:
249:
245:
237:
234:
233:
232:
231:
228:
227:
226:
220:
210:
206:
203:
200:
196:
192:
188:
185:
182:
179:
176:
173:
170:
167:
164:
160:
157:
156:Find sources:
152:
149:
143:
139:
135:
131:
126:
122:
117:
113:
109:
105:
104:Megan and Liz
101:
100:
94:
91:
89:
86:
84:
81:
79:
76:
74:
71:
63:
62:Megan and Liz
60:
58:
57:
54:
51:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
643:
640:
615:
602:(let's chat)
574:(let's chat)
548:
528:
499:
475:
473:
446:
443:common sense
442:
425:
423:
390:
354:
309:
289:
279:
235:
223:
222:
216:
204:
198:
190:
183:
177:
171:
165:
155:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
512:Ron Ritzman
455:Herostratus
364:Herostratus
290:Uncle Milty
181:free images
410:WP:CRYSTAL
244:his otters
451:WP:NMUSIC
439:WP:NMUSIC
420:WP:NMUSIC
264:• Gene93k
219:WP:NMUSIC
620:WP:MUSIC
501:Relisted
359:WP:MUSIC
337:WP:MUSIC
322:WP:MUSIC
318:WP:MUSIC
314:WP:MUSIC
148:View log
48:. v/r -
187:WP refs
175:scholar
121:protect
116:history
599:Yaksar
585:BabbaQ
571:Yaksar
553:BabbaQ
529:Delete
445:, and
380:Ok...
280:Delete
236:Delete
159:Google
125:delete
391:Oprah
355:don't
325:acts:
202:JSTOR
163:books
142:views
134:watch
130:links
16:<
630:talk
616:Keep
589:talk
557:talk
549:Keep
540:talk
516:talk
459:talk
368:talk
310:Keep
297:talk
268:talk
195:FENS
169:news
138:logs
112:talk
108:edit
209:TWL
146:– (
632:)
591:)
559:)
518:)
461:)
370:)
294:|
270:)
262:—
259:.
242:,
221:.
189:)
140:|
136:|
132:|
128:|
123:|
119:|
114:|
110:|
628:(
587:(
555:(
514:(
457:(
412:.
366:(
301:|
285:|
266:(
213:)
205:·
199:·
191:·
184:·
178:·
172:·
166:·
161:(
153:(
150:)
144:)
106:(
53:P
50:T
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.