Talk:Seismatik
 | This article was nominated for deletion on 11 September 2017. The result of the discussion was redirect. |
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | It is requested that an image or photograph of Seismatik be included in this article to improve its quality. Please replace this template with a more specific media request template where possible. The Free Image Search Tool or Openverse Creative Commons Search may be able to locate suitable images on Flickr and other web sites. |
Requested move 4 August 2017
[edit]- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: page moved. Andrewa (talk) 00:12, 12 August 2017 (UTC)
SEISMATIK → Seismatik – Unless SEISMATIK is an acronym. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:33, 4 August 2017 (UTC)
- Support per argument, but I personally feel like this band is not notable and this article should be deleted. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:2DBB:5CB9:A2DD:51C6 (talk) 00:13, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
- Support but likewise not sure this band passes WP:NMUSIC In ictu oculi (talk) 12:19, 5 August 2017 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Notability
[edit]I get plenty of RSS hits at Google [1] (mixed in with an unsurprising number of primary sources).
The material is clearly encyclopedic IMO, but as only one of the members currently has their own Wikipedia article, this material could possibly be merged to that article. But as two other members at least have been prominent in other notable bands, it seems best to me to keep the article as it is, in terms of reader experience. Andrewa (talk) 00:21, 12 August 2017 (UTC)