Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Double Take (group)

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 no consensus. Per WP:NPASR. (non-admin closure)UY Scuti Talk 19:31, 22 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Double Take (group) (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)
Hot Problems (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Clearly I am undecided if this and/or the so-called pop duo is really this notable as their notability only lasted less than a week despite being trivially mentioned in a number of news outlets just as Day Above Ground (AfD) did in 2013, unlike the same longer term web-viral impact that Rebecca Black or Alison Gold enjoyed, so therefore WP:BLP1E and WP:BIO1E applies also since then the pair appeared to have given up on their career as I guess this article assumed WP:RISING and WP:CRYSTAL. Donnie Park (talk) 18:23, 1 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:21, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America1000 05:21, 2 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Was easily able to find additional secondary source coverage with the following search parameters:
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL}
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL}
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL}
Hope that's helpful, — Cirt (talk) 03:46, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
So has Day Above Ground, except because they are less offensive and being young fenales, they are not as forgotten as easily. The same point that I've made above, most of these sources are just in that period of one week in April 2012 and the media have ignored them ever since, therefore a WP:BLP1E case. Donnie Park (talk) 08:56, 3 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 04:30, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:42, 15 November 2015 (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.
Uses material from the Wikipedia article Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Double Take (group), released under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license.