Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Opensouls

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. JForget 00:10, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Opensouls

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

Contested speedy of A7, claiming notability as "They are widely known in New Zealand There have received alot of coverage on New Zealand television for there two albums. They have had 2 charted albums in the Official New Zealand album chart." Neutral pending further research into references I'^mperator 12:53, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. -- –Juliancolton | ^Talk 12:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- I'^mperator 12:55, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep evidence of third party coverage. [1]. including coverage in major NZ newspaper [2] and [3]. LibStar (talk) 14:42, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Their two albums having made the NZ charts probably qualify them per WP:BAND. The references should be edited though. The main one (from infonews.co.nz) is written by "Isaac Promotions" which sounds just a tad too close to home. Favonian (talk) 15:10, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep charted [4] [5]. Duffbeerforme (talk) 17:22, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: The band's two albums have charted. Joe Chill (talk) 19:26, 6 September 2009 (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.