| Revision as of 16:16, 29 July 2007 editSwerdnaneb (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,805 edits →[]: keep← Previous edit | Revision as of 16:17, 29 July 2007 edit undoSwerdnaneb (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users2,805 editsm →[]: I talk good one day.Next edit → | ||
| Line 24: | Line 24: | ||
| *'''Keep''', notable. Darn lazy deletionists. ] 07:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | *'''Keep''', notable. Darn lazy deletionists. ] 07:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
| **] ], ]. I've said again and again, it '''has no sources'''. --''']'']'']''' 15:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | **] ], ]. I've said again and again, it '''has no sources'''. --''']'']'']''' 15:33, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
| *'''Keep''' How about the Billboard Magazine article? It seems like their album's ranking so well on three Billboard's charts would satisfy criteria 2 of ]. The pic in the article will probably have to be deleted over copyright issues (it looks like it's from the Billboard article), but that's a cleanup issue. I can see why this looks deletable. I can also see why it could be keepable. I'm kind of ambivalent. But I do think that the article satisfies the requirements. -- ] 16:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' How about the Billboard Magazine article? It seems like their album's ranking so well on three of Billboard's charts would satisfy criteria 2 of ]. The pic in the article will probably have to be deleted over copyright issues (it looks like it's from the Billboard article), but that's a cleanup issue. I can see why this looks deletable. I can also see why it could be keepable. I'm kind of ambivalent. But I do think that the article satisfies the requirements. -- ] 16:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
Revision as of 16:17, 29 July 2007
Alexis Y Fido
– (View log)
- Alexis Y Fido (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- The Pitbulls (Alexis y Fido album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Los Reyes Del Perreo (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Sobrenatural (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- Wild Dogz (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
Non-notable reggaeton duo. Only "reference" is their Myspace page and the image on the article will likely be deleted soon. Only information on the article is their singles and albums. A Google search only shows their song's lyrics. I say delete. -- Boricuaeddie 16:15, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Strong delete, no notability to be seen. I added their albums to the discussion. Ten Pound Hammer • 16:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. I agree that they should all be deleted. --Boricuaeddie 16:56, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletions. -- the wub "?!" 16:50, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Delete all per WP:NOT#MYSPACE. -- MarcoTolo 22:54, 25 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep I created the article and I am trying to expand it more with reliable sources. Please give me time and a chance.Nosaints4life 17:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- The sources you added are not third-party, reliable sources, as one of them is theirs and the other, I doubt is neutral and reliable. --Boricuaeddie 23:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Comment I added Wild Dogz to this AfD; User:Ohconfucius had nominated that one separately, but I think it should be rolled into this one. Ten Pound Hammer • 18:30, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
- SHOULD NOT BE DELETED: The article shouldnt be deleted becasue i expanded it more with more information on their biography and I have a couple of sources, making the site reliable and true.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Nosaints4life (talk • contribs).
- Please note; this user has participated twice in this discussion. --Boricuaeddie 23:49, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep: This is one of the few reggaeton articles that makes sense and is in good format. It also has some information about the duo, unlike other articles.Truko9308 16:50, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, but the duo is not notable and the article provides no references. --Boricuaeddie 17:52, 28 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep, notable. Darn lazy deletionists. Kappa 07:50, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
- Keep How about the Billboard Magazine article? It seems like their album's ranking so well on three of Billboard's charts would satisfy criteria 2 of WP:BAND. The pic in the article will probably have to be deleted over copyright issues (it looks like it's from the Billboard article), but that's a cleanup issue. I can see why this looks deletable. I can also see why it could be keepable. I'm kind of ambivalent. But I do think that the article satisfies the requirements. -- Ben 16:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)