Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Siena Root

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:18, 21 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Siena Root (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)

This is an article about non-notable band that fails both WP:BAND and WP:GNG. It originally had one source, the band's web page when I added a prod template. The article's creator, Dfisek, added three sources and removed the prod. None of the three sources are reliable sources and they were simply placed at the end of sentences without any other changes to the article. Aspects (talk) 07:35, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 14:14, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete as none of this suggests better applicable notability. SwisterTwister talk 21:38, 7 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The AllMusic page, the Progarchives, the Magnificent Music together meet notability requirements, and when combined with the articles found on GoogleNews, more than meet notability requirements (WP:GNG and WP:BAND). Softlavender (talk) 09:53, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep. Of the sources cited in the article, only Allmusic is reliable, but there does seem to be more coverage around. --Michig (talk) 08:20, 14 February 2016 (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.