Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Curtis Mayflower

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  09:11, 26 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The Curtis Mayflower (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not notable. Lacks coverage in independent reliable sources, nothing much past indiscriminate local puff. duffbeerforme (talk) 13:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Massachusetts-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 15:34, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 15:34, 5 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:14, 12 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:59, 19 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Keep. Per request for fresh assessment with resisting: FWIW Chubbles, "Revue" website is international, I suppose, the way anything on the web is international, but it is unfortunately a weak source per their editorial policy of encouraging artists to submit promotional content. I'm kind of bothered that this band hasn't really accomplished much of significance. I'm also a bit troubled that there are not that many sources beyond regional coverage. Yet that is not a disqualifier, and some of the coverage displays independent, third party recognition. That, plus the aforementioned review in No Depression Magazine is enough to squeak it through wikipedia notability criteria. ShelbyMarion (talk) 17:30, 21 November 2017 (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.