Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Neon Hunk
- 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 no consensus. Star Mississippi 02:18, 26 November 2024 (UTC)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Neon Hunk (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)
I believe this article should be deleted for a few reasons; the first and most major is notability. I do not believe, at least as of this time, this duo is notable enough to have a page on Wikipedia. The article lacks sources, only featuring one that was put in the article in 2015. I've searched for sources to add to the article and can only find one article, a Pitchfork review, on an album they published, rather than the duo themselves. The article uses non-neutral language, such as "other noise/freak weirdos". It also contains a lot of unsourced speculation, stating that part of the duo is working on a full-length album, but this has never been published or confirmed by any source. Most of the wikilinks on the article go to non-existant pages, and no pages for the discography of the duo exist at all. This page has existed for years (since 2004 according to the edit history) and in that time, no verifiable and trustworthy sources have given notable information about the duo. Beachweak (talk) 11:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Wisconsin. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:46, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comment there's a Pitchfork review ([1]) and an AllMusic review ([2]). toweli (talk) 11:52, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- These reviews are focused on an album created by the duo, Smarmymob, rather than the duo themselves. Beachweak (talk) 13:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Fair enough, I was just noting the existence of two reviews. Leaning delete, unless more sources are found. toweli (talk) 18:37, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- These reviews are focused on an album created by the duo, Smarmymob, rather than the duo themselves. Beachweak (talk) 13:44, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- delete no sources to establish notability. --Altenmann >talk 18:07, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Weak keep. Also found reviews of Smarmymob in Stylus Magazine [3], Dusted Magazine [4], Suburban Voice [5] and this more trivial output: [6] and this one: [7] @Beachweak of course reviews are of albums. Albums are what musicians make. Do you propose an article is written about the album instead? Geschichte (talk) 20:23, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- I think if there are enough reviews of the album (which there are proving to be), an article could be written about Smarmymob; however, the article on the duo themselves doesn't seem notable enough to be kept, at least as of right now. It's ten years old and only has one, weak source. Beachweak (talk) 21:48, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Do you agree that Neon Hunk then should be preserved as a redirect to Smarmybob, failing a keep outcome here? Geschichte (talk) 11:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- Not a bad idea to turn the page into a redirect rather than deleting it entirely; somebody would have to write the article on the album, though. Maybe delete the page until an article is published and then turn it into a redirect? Beachweak (talk) 12:12, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- Do you agree that Neon Hunk then should be preserved as a redirect to Smarmybob, failing a keep outcome here? Geschichte (talk) 11:53, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- I think if there are enough reviews of the album (which there are proving to be), an article could be written about Smarmymob; however, the article on the duo themselves doesn't seem notable enough to be kept, at least as of right now. It's ten years old and only has one, weak source. Beachweak (talk) 21:48, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note that under WP:A9, if the band/musician is non-notable and has no article, then an article for their album needs solid evidence that it has significance. I'm not sure if the few scattered reviews for Smarmybob will suffice. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- How many would it need? As far as getting reviews go, it doesn't get much more significant than Pitchfork, and I think the other ones look very promising in sum. I'm somewhat struggling to take the proposition seriously that an album with Pitchfork, Allmusic and other reviews would be regarded as a speedy candidate. Geschichte (talk) 20:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- In my view, WP:A9 is there for a reason. An album article is not particularly encyclopedic when an interested reader cannot learn more about the band because they're not notable enough for their own article. That's my take on this side discussion about the album, and otherwise I am undecided about deleting or keeping the band and will have to leave it at that. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:19, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- The issue isn't about the album; my proposition is to delete the page ABOUT the duo. In the future, there could be an article written about the album, but the duo Neon Hunk, at least right now, are not very notable source wise. If you review the article right now, there is one source that isn't very descriptive (and currently leads to a 404). Apart from that, the entire article is unsourced. I still think it should be deleted unless more sources about the duo are found. Beachweak (talk) 20:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- I was replying to Doomsdayer Geschichte (talk) 12:25, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
- How many would it need? As far as getting reviews go, it doesn't get much more significant than Pitchfork, and I think the other ones look very promising in sum. I'm somewhat struggling to take the proposition seriously that an album with Pitchfork, Allmusic and other reviews would be regarded as a speedy candidate. Geschichte (talk) 20:17, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
- Note that under WP:A9, if the band/musician is non-notable and has no article, then an article for their album needs solid evidence that it has significance. I'm not sure if the few scattered reviews for Smarmybob will suffice. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:50, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 15:43, 11 November 2024 (UTC)Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 19:55, 18 November 2024 (UTC)
- Comments: as a rule, I ask that proponents of new sources to keep an article be included for me to evaluate the results for WP: HEY. Bearian (talk) 05:50, 20 November 2024 (UTC)
- Keep. Meets WP:GNG per the sources presented in this discussion thread.4meter4 (talk) 11:46, 25 November 2024 (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.