Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amnesia Scanner

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. (non-admin closure) Szzuk (talk) 17:15, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amnesia Scanner (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

I don't believe this meets notability standards. Nerd1a4i (talk) 01:27, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 04:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Discuss 04:53, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep Marginal I guess, but it might just about satisfy WP:NBAND, their works and shows have received many reviews, e.g. Pitchfork (which rated it one of the best experimental albums of 2016 - [1] and one of the highest-rated glitch hop music - [2]), AllMusic, Resident Advisor, Odessey Online, and Fact Mag. Other coverage - [3], and mentioned in relation to "crypto-raves" [4][5]. Possibly also qualify under WP:BAND #5 for their releases with a notable indie label . Hzh (talk) 14:23, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Coverage available is sufficient to satisfy notability guidelines, and the artists are clearly prominent in their genre. --Michig (talk) 08:47, 17 March 2018 (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.