Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Almerões

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 delete. -- Cirt (talk) 18:12, 16 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Almerões

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

This band does not appear to meet the applicable notability guideline. They are unsigned, and their coverage appears to consist primarily of interviews in blogs. VQuakr (talk) 03:36, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I don't agree that the condition of a band being unsigned should count on those cases, the market is full of independent bands, that are unsigned, however are reference of a country culture and became even more important and meaningful than some signed bands. At least this is the current scenario in Brazil. In what regards their coverage, in the website Portal Mogi Guaçu (which is not a blog, is a reliable communication vehicle with over 1 million views/month) article of the band, the article also includes an interview, but we have to consider that before the interview, the publisher Tarso Zagato write a press release of the band and also express a brief opinion. In addition I have updated the Almerões Wikipedia article with more detailed information of the band. Hope it helps us to solve this discussion. Sincerelly Nothingtrust (talk) 16:02, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This article contained some grammar errors, I corrected it. Hope it helps. 32.104.18.240 (talk) 14:39, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I linked this article with 3 others related articles 32.104.18.240 (talk) 17:15, 2 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I searched English and Portuguese sources. Only hits are either mp3 downloads, social media, or non-notable reviews. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 02:28, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with this deletion, however I've got no more arguments to support this page (even given the fact I do believe this is compliant with Wikipedia rules/guidelines). I am working hard and researching to see if I can find more "notable/reliable" sources and I will re-submit this article once I have it in hands. I would like to say Thanks for all the discussion and comprehension 32.104.18.240 (talk) 19:14, 13 June 2011 (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.