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.  Sandstein  19:35, 9 December 2015 (UTC) reply

Clocks (band)

Clocks (band) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Going to take this to AfD to settle the contested notability issue. And frankly, this defunct band sits right on the borderline. The band is mentioned in multiple sources independent of the band itself, seemingly satisfying the first guideline of WP:NMUSIC. However, it fails every other aspect of WP:NMUSIC and although an album was recorded on an independent label, it was never released. While technically it would pass WP:NMUSIC due to satisfying criterion #1 of that guideline, I really don't think this band every truly became notable. Therefore, I will go with a weak delete. Safiel ( talk) 02:47, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply

• Keep - as far as I can infer from the article, it satisfies #1 and #2 of WP:NMUSIC, having a single released. LjL ( talk) 02:55, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply

• Comment I would note that the single that was released was on a minor, non notable, label. It does not appear they ever released anything on the notable label that they were signed to. Safiel ( talk) 03:37, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply

• Discogs.com lists two singles on Island Records, these can also be found on Amazon and in reviews including Gigwise review of "All I Can" and Manchester Evening News review of "Old Valve Radio". Nothing on Officialcharts.com, so they did not reach top 75 of UK Singles chart; the band probably meets criterion 1 but not criterion 2. Peter James ( talk) 21:29, 19 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. -- Ascii002 ( talk · contribs · guestbook) 02:58, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Ascii002 ( talk · contribs · guestbook) 02:58, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Ascii002 ( talk · contribs · guestbook) 02:58, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply

• Delete - Searches found nothing to suggest better at this time. Notifying PRODer Karst and only still active AfD commenter The Rambling Man. SwisterTwister talk 06:34, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply
• Delete - Unfortunate story really where the whole thing appears to have collapsed during the credit crunch. In the end, three singles and a handful of a support-slots does not add up to much. I landed on the page yesterday as it was listed as having reference errors. The majority of links are dead. I was able to retrieve the article from a local newspaper, but that did not really add to the notability. The links to the producer website are just that, him talking about his work with the occasional mention of the band as they obviously had been booked in. Perhaps it can be partly moved to the List of former Island Records artists. Karst ( talk) 11:06, 17 November 2015 (UTC) reply
• Keep meets WP:GNG and WP:BAND criterion 1. Some references added at the time of the first AFD were removed because they had been put into a "trivia" section when they could have been integrated into the article. Peter James ( talk) 21:34, 19 November 2015 (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.