Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Megalopsy

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 22:17, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Megalopsy

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Non-notable band/project. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:38, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A dark psytrance project from Argentina, consisting of two guys. I think they are not notable. The article has a primary sources tag since 2007. The article is also very poorly sourced to the official website and Discogs, none of them establish any notability. I did a Google search and I couldn't find anything besides the standard unreliable sites (databases, streaming service entries, retail sites, trivial mentions/name checks and blogs). This is another example of a non-notable band that managed to hide in the shadows so it can remain here for a long time despite the fact that it is not notable. The only site that comes close to reliable is an interview, but some say it's also a primary source so I am not fully convinced anymore that interviews provide notability. (On Hungarian Wikipedia (I am Hungarian), interviews are considered reliable sources so that's why I use them or think of them as RS). But whatever the case with interviews, I did not found anything that makes this project notable. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:36, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:38, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Argentina-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:38, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closer for soft deletion: This nomination has had limited participation and falls within the standards set for lack of quorum. There are no previous AfD discussions, undeletions, or current redirects and no previous PRODs have been located. This nomination may be eligible for soft deletion at the end of its 7-day listing. --Cewbot (talk) 00:03, 30 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Logs: 2007-12 ✗ CSD G11, 2007-12 ↻ restored, 2007-12 ✗ CSD G12

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.