827:
knowledge) actually succeeding in doing what they do as well as they do. GLR itself is a completely fresh approach to making music in general, and P-Murder are at the forefront of that, so.. I suppose it comes down to that ambiguity again; it is quite undeground - we dont send press releases to tv stations or the radio because we dont want our music played there. So it is somewhat of an anomole as far as Wiki rules go (IMO).
814:). Again, this ambiguous word 'notable' comes into play - well for a lot of people Psychedelic Murder ARE notable. I don't have my figures here with me but our site (though not long established) averages well over 100 hits a day - and Psychedelic Murder are arguably one of our best acts, so thats a lot of potential notability there, even if just in-passing.
1046:...it never ceases to amaze me how many bands don't want publicity from other sources, yet think they justify an article. Even the most obscure of notable acts get covered in the local indy papers or the "What's around town" of the large papers. Unfortunately, if you're "underground", you don't exist as far as Knowledge (XXG) is concerned, see
454:
however - before I could complete my comment the page had been deleted. unsure what to do i followed a few links and found 'deletion review'. So below this line I'm going to paste in what would have been my case on the article's 'talk' page, following the initial discussion (for context) - my comment is the very last:
817:
You must also bear in mind that we distribute free cd's almost everywhere we go - so thats already a fairly good demographic, at least a few hundred people in the south-west UK will own a P-Murder CD (consider that their first CD offering only came in
November of last year). Even more people will own
563:
ok well, this band may not be a major main stream act. but they still are a musical group with 2 albums released through green leaf records. i happen to see this group live before as well. in fresno califorina. and this happens to be a real 2 man band. after there last album battle of the harvest im
1005:
Actually, the nominator did ask me to return the page and I declined, for approximately the reasons you read here; you can read the entire lengthy exchange on my talk page. I wasn't aware that the page had been submitted to deletion review, but I'm not surprised. I'm going to let this process run
453:
i received an email a few hours ago asking for my help. it was from somebody who was making a page for a band that happen to be a part of my record label - California group "The Cult of
Psychedelic Murder". Having read through the notability guidlines I began to create my comment on the talk page,
234:
My, we don't often get old VFD discussions anymore. Since the VFD was unanimous, and the article at the time truly terrible, obviously endorse that close. The
February 2007 version was somewhat better, but still speedy deletable - though I'd have chosen A7 over G4. It has been more than a year
736:
Just because you are not a fan or have never heard of this band does not mean you should delete it. yes, this group is underground, and the reason for the is in all the words if you listen to battle of the harvest. as far as i know alot of people listen to this group. battle of the harvest was
826:
Have you heard this music? Its not like anything anyone's done before - for a start its self-produced (ok, no biggie) but its a lucid blend of hip-hop, psychedelic rock, folk-rock, surf-blues and general experimentism - they prominently represent this sound because there is no one else (to my
210:
not for eligibility to write it anew, that is, to say, I'm not planning to write it completely from scratch, I think it was fine, although I haven't seen it since it's always being deleted, if it really has no references I can add a sentence about popularity and a link to alexa.com rankings.
649:
you have a point on the google search, let me remind you how i found out about this band. they mainly release there musical free via soulseek. bit torrent. i found alot of there music being traded. i made this page not because im a fan, but because their works should be noticed.
449:
Good evening, morning or afternoon - wherever you may be.. I have come to contest a deletion (as you may have guessed). pardon the lack of punctuation but it is past 2am for me and I have never joined wikipedia until tonight, let alone made a deletion review request.
486:
deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under
Knowledge (XXG) guidelines.
800:
Well this is true so far. My own site (certainly an independent source, we're on a different continent) has published numerous records, lyrics and images from the band in question. In fact they gave me some more tracks tonight, so there's even more to come.
957:", so to answer Colonel Warden, the fact that this discussion is happening doesn't mean the deletion needs to be overturned soley based on policy. In fact, even adding the {{hangon}} tag does not ensure the page won't be speedied; the hangon tag states "
809:
Well GLR certainly isn't one of THE more important labels - but bear in mind there are a lot of them out there. However, our first release was four years ago and we have just over 20 records from over 8 different artists featured at our site
752:
I Understand that, but if there isn't any substantive content to prove the band's notability, then they do not belong on
Knowledge (XXG). Again, please stop being so defensive. The guidelines for deletion and notability can be found on
84:
we already discussed this. There is no reason that a sourced article cannot be introduced into article space and the location is not protected. All the user needs to do is write a new article based on sources. The old page can be
886:
The user above is asserting notability and so speedy deletion is inappropriate. These new editors should be allowed reasonable time to prepare the article which can go to AFD in th usual way if it still seems inadequate.
805:"Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable)."
904:. The article, as it was written, made A7. Whether or not an article can be written about the subject is irrelevant to this and doesn't need to be discussed at all here, the page isn't salted. If you have
822:"Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Knowledge (XXG) standards, including verifiability."
737:
released in a CD form in
Califorina in most smoke shops. there is actually a strong following in the "real world" compared to the world wide web. i strongly feel this article should stay.
235:
since then, so you ought to be able to write a new article making the claim made above. However, alexa.com rankings aren't really relevant. What we really want is for you to use
397:
392:
401:
697:
606:
579:
622:
426:
384:
181:
51:
271:
81:
37:
863:
guidelines. With 73 Google hits, that doesn't seem to exist. Stuff posted on your website does not count as a reliable source, as you and yout site have a
440:
1021:
I only saw the notice that the page had been submitted to DRV rather than any discussion, but I'll trust that the discussion exists if you say it does.
46:
1067:
without prejudice. There's no reason that the article shouldn't be recreated when and if it can be properly sourced, but deletion was appropriate.
961:…"" So, does the page meet the CSD criteria? IMHO yes. There is a total lack of third-party sources on this band, and therefore they fail the
796:"It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable."
194:, the claim that it is an advertisement has just as much force as a claim that it is not advertisement, i.e., none, if you really like Law),
742:
693:
602:
575:
524:
511:
859:
publications - newspapers, magazines, radio, etc. - that are specifically about the band to indicate that it is in fact going to pass our
42:
959:
Note that this request is not binding, and the page may still be deleted if the page unquestionably meets the speedy deletion criteria
491:
21:
867:
in this regard. Unless more people than you folks are talking about the band in notable sources, it is not yet notable. Sorry.
788:
Well I think this really comes down to semantics and what you define as 'notable' - media attention or actual public awareness?
738:
689:
598:
571:
520:
507:
138:
133:
936:
286:
142:
767:
722:
668:
635:
549:
478:
388:
190:
The reasons given for the original deletion has no basis, the reason being a claim that the article is an advertisement (
838:
167:
125:
1087:
363:
318:
104:
17:
253:
380:
339:
1072:
1012:
224:
216:
892:
654:
Unfortunately, Knowledge (XXG) is not a place to promote a non-notable entity. For more information, check out
531:==New Album in 2009== from what i hear the band has takin a break and is not working on any other projects....
955:
Where reasonable doubt exists, discussion using another method under the deletion policy should occur instead
834:
1030:
996:
1068:
685:
621:, but I doubt that they are notable enough to qualify for a wikipedia page. A google search only brings up
594:
567:
348:
243:
of the site for the new article, and to reference them. So, endorse deletions, encourage a new article.
1007:
460:
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding
343:– Speedy deletion endorsed. No prejudice against recreation if appropriate sources can be provided. –
220:
212:
1076:
1059:
1034:
1016:
1000:
982:
970:
941:
896:
876:
842:
775:
746:
730:
701:
676:
643:
610:
583:
557:
528:
515:
352:
305:
291:
265:
247:
228:
93:
1055:
965:
test. A note to Green Leaf, using your own website as a source is not a reliable source, as it is
888:
301:
261:
535:
Can you prove that the band is notable? So far, it doesn't seem like they meet the guidelines for
86:
932:
872:
282:
252:
There shouldn't be a problem getting a copy of the article in your userspace to work on (say, at
860:
655:
536:
818:
the mp3s - not just in the UK, but globally - as they're more easily attained via the website.
978:
764:
719:
665:
632:
546:
344:
987:
Can the nominator please explain why he chose to ignore the instruction on this page saying "
973:, and indeed many may like it, but that's not a substitute for outside proof of notability.
917:
754:
709:
503:
499:
240:
129:
950:
921:
864:
495:
465:
905:
852:
433:
236:
174:
1051:
297:
257:
1047:
966:
962:
913:
909:
856:
925:
868:
490:
For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria
275:
974:
758:
713:
659:
626:
540:
506:. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this.
244:
90:
418:
159:
1026:
992:
121:
76:
590:
708:
Actually, a fairly standard means of determining notability can be found at
206:(NE Europe). Also I would like to point out that I nominate the article for
682:
who says this band is not notable? it sounds like that is your opinion.
476:
the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on
991:, attempt to discuss the matter with the admin who deleted the page"?
203:
1006:
without my further input; I've already had my say about this page.
851:. To answer the above, there are a few issues here: first, we need
296:
And the exact same userfication advice was given. And ignored. --
920:, then have it. However, I do highly suggest you take a look at
712:. Please try not to get so defensive, I'm just trying to help.
811:
482:
explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for
564:
not sure if they are working on any new stuff until 2009.
1050:. No prejudice to recreation if sources can be found. --
414:
410:
406:
155:
151:
147:
830:Have I helped make the case for these guys so far?
270:No !vote here, but this was discussed already on
8:
362:The following is an archived debate of the
103:The following is an archived debate of the
332:
69:
792:From Knowledge (XXG)'s notability guide:
589:this is link has more info on the group
41:
922:our guidelines on conflicts of interest
50:
33:
7:
1090:of the page listed in the heading.
321:of the page listed in the heading.
198:the subject of the article is the
28:
853:reliable, independent references
757:if you have any more questions.
617:I don't doubt that the group is
254:User:Lysis rationale/Draugiem.lv
1086:The above is an archive of the
989:Before listing a review request
317:The above is an archive of the
18:Knowledge (XXG):Deletion review
381:The cult of psychedelic murder
340:The cult of psychedelic murder
1:
30:
1048:the verifiability guidelines
812:http://greenleafrecords.com
472:to the top of the article (
219:) 14:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
1113:
739:Scary dragon atop the hill
690:Scary dragon atop the hill
599:Scary dragon atop the hill
572:Scary dragon atop the hill
521:Scary dragon atop the hill
508:Scary dragon atop the hill
1077:18:03, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
353:21:27, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
306:05:32, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
94:09:53, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
1093:Please do not modify it.
1060:16:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
1035:14:13, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
1017:13:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
1001:12:15, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
983:12:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
942:11:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
897:10:00, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
877:04:32, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
843:01:19, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
776:23:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
747:23:24, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
731:23:18, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
702:23:16, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
677:23:07, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
644:22:49, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
611:22:36, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
584:22:34, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
558:22:27, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
529:22:57, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
516:23:54, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
369:Please do not modify it.
324:Please do not modify it.
292:23:59, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
266:16:53, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
256:), if you want that. --
248:15:37, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
229:14:30, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
110:Please do not modify it.
43:Deletion review archives
479:the article's talk page
366:of the article above.
107:of the article above.
969:. I understand that
865:conflict of interest
89:at their request. –
835:Green Leaf Records
1100:
1099:
1015:
940:
875:
704:
688:comment added by
613:
597:comment added by
586:
570:comment added by
331:
330:
290:
60:
59:
1104:
1095:
1069:Lastingsmilledge
1023:Endorse deletion
1011:
1008:Accounting4Taste
947:Endorse Deletion
930:
906:reliable sources
871:
761:
716:
683:
662:
629:
592:
565:
543:
471:
470:
464:
436:
422:
404:
371:
333:
326:
280:
237:reliable sources
177:
163:
145:
112:
70:
56:
36:
31:
1112:
1111:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1103:
1102:
1101:
1091:
1088:deletion review
772:
759:
727:
714:
673:
660:
640:
627:
554:
541:
492:for biographies
468:
462:
461:
445:
439:
432:
431:
425:
395:
379:
367:
364:deletion review
322:
319:deletion review
221:Lysis rationale
213:Lysis rationale
186:
180:
173:
172:
166:
136:
120:
108:
105:deletion review
68:
61:
54:
34:
26:
25:
24:
12:
11:
5:
1110:
1108:
1098:
1097:
1082:
1081:
1080:
1079:
1062:
1041:
1040:
1039:
1038:
1037:
985:
967:self published
944:
924:. Cheers. --
899:
889:Colonel Warden
880:
879:
790:
789:
784:
781:
779:
778:
768:
734:
733:
723:
680:
679:
669:
647:
646:
636:
561:
560:
550:
457:
447:
446:
443:
437:
429:
423:
374:
373:
358:
357:
356:
355:
329:
328:
313:
312:
311:
310:
309:
308:
274:. Cheers. --
268:
250:
188:
187:
184:
178:
170:
164:
115:
114:
99:
98:
97:
96:
67:
62:
58:
57:
49:
40:
29:
27:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1109:
1096:
1094:
1089:
1084:
1083:
1078:
1074:
1070:
1066:
1063:
1061:
1057:
1053:
1049:
1045:
1042:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1025:per Livitup.
1024:
1020:
1019:
1018:
1014:
1009:
1004:
1003:
1002:
998:
994:
990:
986:
984:
980:
976:
972:
968:
964:
960:
956:
952:
948:
945:
943:
938:
934:
929:
928:
923:
919:
915:
911:
907:
903:
900:
898:
894:
890:
885:
882:
881:
878:
874:
870:
866:
862:
858:
854:
850:
847:
846:
845:
844:
840:
836:
831:
828:
824:
823:
819:
815:
813:
808:
806:
802:
798:
797:
793:
787:
786:
785:
782:
777:
773:
771:
765:
762:
756:
751:
750:
749:
748:
744:
740:
732:
728:
726:
720:
717:
711:
707:
706:
705:
703:
699:
695:
691:
687:
678:
674:
672:
666:
663:
657:
653:
652:
651:
645:
641:
639:
633:
630:
624:
620:
616:
615:
614:
612:
608:
604:
600:
596:
591:
587:
585:
581:
577:
573:
569:
559:
555:
553:
547:
544:
538:
534:
533:
532:
530:
526:
522:
518:
517:
513:
509:
505:
504:for companies
501:
497:
496:for web sites
493:
488:
485:
481:
480:
475:
467:
458:
455:
451:
442:
435:
428:
420:
416:
412:
408:
403:
399:
394:
390:
386:
382:
378:
377:
376:
375:
372:
370:
365:
360:
359:
354:
350:
346:
342:
341:
337:
336:
335:
334:
327:
325:
320:
315:
314:
307:
303:
299:
295:
294:
293:
288:
284:
279:
278:
273:
269:
267:
263:
259:
255:
251:
249:
246:
242:
238:
233:
232:
231:
230:
226:
222:
218:
214:
209:
205:
201:
197:
193:
183:
176:
169:
161:
157:
153:
149:
144:
140:
135:
131:
127:
123:
119:
118:
117:
116:
113:
111:
106:
101:
100:
95:
92:
88:
83:
79:
78:
74:
73:
72:
71:
66:
63:
53:
48:
44:
39:
32:
23:
19:
1092:
1085:
1064:
1043:
1022:
988:
958:
954:
949:—First off,
946:
926:
901:
883:
849:Keep deleted
848:
832:
829:
825:
821:
820:
816:
807:
804:
803:
799:
795:
794:
791:
783:
780:
769:
735:
724:
681:
670:
648:
637:
618:
588:
562:
551:
519:
489:
483:
477:
473:
459:
456:
452:
448:
368:
361:
345:IronGargoyle
338:
323:
316:
276:
207:
200:most visited
199:
195:
191:
189:
109:
102:
75:
64:
971:you like it
833:Alex@GLRuk
684:—Preceding
593:—Preceding
566:—Preceding
241:independent
122:Draugiem.lv
77:Draugiem.lv
65:9 July 2008
963:notability
914:notability
474:just below
208:undeletion
82:Apparantly
1052:UsaSatsui
500:for bands
298:UsaSatsui
258:UsaSatsui
239:that are
192:or rather
47:2008 July
937:Contribs
927:lifebaka
918:the band
884:Overturn
869:Tony Fox
861:WP:MUSIC
698:contribs
686:unsigned
656:WP:SOAPS
607:contribs
595:unsigned
580:contribs
568:unsigned
537:WP:MUSIC
287:Contribs
277:lifebaka
272:May 10th
202:site in
87:userfied
20: |
1065:Endorse
1044:Endorse
975:Livitup
902:Endorse
857:notable
770:Contrib
760:Rwiggum
755:WP:BAND
725:Contrib
715:Rwiggum
710:WP:BAND
671:Contrib
661:Rwiggum
638:Contrib
628:Rwiggum
623:73 hits
552:Contrib
542:Rwiggum
427:restore
398:protect
393:history
245:GRBerry
196:however
168:restore
139:protect
134:history
91:Spartaz
52:July 10
1027:Stifle
993:Stifle
953:says "
951:WP:CSD
910:verify
873:(arf!)
484:speedy
466:hangon
402:delete
204:Latvia
143:delete
38:July 8
502:, or
434:cache
419:views
411:watch
407:links
175:cache
160:views
152:watch
148:links
55:: -->
16:<
1073:talk
1056:talk
1031:talk
1013:talk
997:talk
979:talk
933:Talk
912:the
893:talk
839:talk
743:talk
694:talk
619:real
603:talk
576:talk
525:talk
512:talk
415:logs
389:talk
385:edit
349:talk
302:talk
283:Talk
262:talk
225:talk
217:talk
156:logs
130:talk
126:edit
35:<
916:of
908:to
855:in
441:AfD
182:AfD
22:Log
1075:)
1058:)
1033:)
999:)
981:)
935:-
895:)
841:)
774:)
745:)
729:)
700:)
696:•
675:)
658:.
642:)
625:.
609:)
605:•
582:)
578:•
556:)
539:.
527:)
514:)
498:,
494:,
469:}}
463:{{
417:|
413:|
409:|
405:|
400:|
396:|
391:|
387:|
351:)
304:)
285:-
264:)
227:)
158:|
154:|
150:|
146:|
141:|
137:|
132:|
128:|
80:–
45::
1071:(
1054:(
1029:(
1010::
995:(
977:(
939:)
931:(
891:(
837:(
810:(
766:/
763:(
741:(
721:/
718:(
692:(
667:/
664:(
634:/
631:(
601:(
574:(
548:/
545:(
523:(
510:(
444:)
438:|
430:|
424:(
421:)
383:(
347:(
300:(
289:)
281:(
260:(
223:(
215:(
185:)
179:|
171:|
165:(
162:)
124:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.