Sewerslvt

Sewerslvt (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG, barely any reliable sources online. Sources used in the article may not be reliable, especially excessive use of Discogs. Toadette^Edit! 08:02, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Australia. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 11:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify: This was very recently moved from draft. Obviously this was premature. UtherSRG (talk) 13:20, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It should be moved back to draft, it definitely is lacking sources right now and is very biased Kawaiidumbassery (talk) 23:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The "excessive use of Discogs" is on the discography section only, alongside musicbrainz.

It does not fail WP:GNG, but may or may not require certain new sources depending on WP:NMUSIC.

Sufficient sources were provided.These include:

https://www.scaruffi.com/vol8/sewerslv.html

https://musicidb.com/artists/Sewerslvt

https://cainhillier.substack.com/p/the-last-time-i-saw-you-sewerslvt

https://gzo.medium.com/draining-love-story-review-analysis-878618e5895

https://microgenremusic.com/review/draining-love-story-by-sewerslvt-music-review/

Some content may have to be revised and/or cut for the unbiased standard. However it is clear it has sufficient, reliable sources that cover the subject on its varying sections. NikolaiVektovich (talk) 19:19, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Addressing the movement from draftspace to articlespace, as said above it is clear it has sufficient, reliable sources that cover the subject on its varying sections. Registered and Autoconfirmed users do not have to go through AfC to create an article, so it was moved. NikolaiVektovich (talk) 19:22, 10 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Medium and Substack are self-published sources. And Discogs and Musicbrainz are not, in fact, used only in the discography, but excessively all throughout the article body. TappyTurtle [talk | contribs] 04:01, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

With my updates I think it meets more requirements of Wikipedia:Notability (music), they have released on two important indie labels which I have updated it to reflect. I think moving it back to draft would be the best choice, it seems to have been published prematurely. Kawaiidumbassery (talk) 00:01, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can see that the consensus so far is to move it back to the draftspace. I am still concerned, there are other articles released with less sources then provided on the article for Sewerslvt. I can also account for the problems on the article, including the reliance on much of one source. There has also been a commons deletion on a primary image used on the article. The article shouldn't be deleted, neither kept on the articlespace. I am still curious though, what defines an article as premature? NikolaiVektovich (talk) 13:42, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Seems to fall short of notability guidelines, and even if draftified I don't see it going far. TappyTurtle [talk | contribs] 04:10, 17 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]