Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chi-Pig

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. The nomination has been countered by sources presented in the discussion, and consensus is that the topic has received enough coverage to qualify (albeit perhaps weakly) for a standalone article. The speedy delete !vote by User:I feel like a tourist does not contain a valid rationale for deletion per the criteria at Wikipedia:Criteria for speedy deletion, and topic notability is not based solely upon album releases or lack of them. The delete !vote by User:Hoof Hearted is not policy- or guideline-based. (Non-administrator closure.) Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:38, 24 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Chi-Pig

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

Couldn't establish WP:NOTABILITY Boleyn (talk) 18:47, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Delete They never released an single album during the years that they claim to have been "active." Their one release mentioned appears to be self-released. Classic non-notable local band. I feel like a tourist (talk) 18:51, 9 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I don't even remember creating this article! (I think I was trying to fill-in a red link.) It was when I was very new to wikipedia and would have known better today. Hoof Hearted (talk) 17:47, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. (Just) passes WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC via [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8]. The article should also cover their earlier band the Poor Girls, which also received some coverage. Chi-Pigs did release a single in 1978, with their album released in 2004. --Michig (talk) 18:10, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ohio-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:36, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:36, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. Band's claim to notability is mostly regional, but the pair of Allmusic write-ups, along with the Village Voice piece, is just enough significant coverage to meet WP:GNG and WP:BAND. Gong show 23:59, 10 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 02:00, 16 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Michig. DavidLeighEllis (talk) 00:28, 22 January 2014 (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.