| Revision as of 16:39, 29 July 2007 editAgüeybaná (talk | contribs)Rollbackers9,714 edits closed as keep; non-admin closure← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:25, 14 November 2011 edit undo96.26.119.45 (talk)No edit summaryNext edit → | ||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
| The result was '''keep'''. Nomination withdrawn. Non-admin closure. --''']'']'']''' 16:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | The result was '''keep'''. Nomination withdrawn. Non-admin closure. --''']'']'']''' 16:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> | – <includeonly>(])</includeonly><noinclude>(])</noinclude> | ||
| :{{la|Alexis |
:{{la|Alexis & Fido}} | ||
| :{{la|The Pitbulls (Alexis |
:{{la|The Pitbulls (Alexis & Fido album)}} | ||
| :{{la|Los Reyes Del Perreo}} | :{{la|Los Reyes Del Perreo}} | ||
| :{{la|Sobrenatural}} | :{{la|Sobrenatural}} | ||
Revision as of 00:25, 14 November 2011
- 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. Nomination withdrawn. Non-admin closure. --Boricuaeddie 16:39, 29 July 2007 (UTC)
Alexis & Fido
– (View log)
- Alexis & Fido (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
- The Pitbulls (Alexis & 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)
- 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.