Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flop (band)

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The result was Withdrawn by nom- per Samir below. Let's not waste any more time on this one. But can someone followup and add some cites, please? - Allie ^❤ 20:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Flop (band)

Flop (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

KILL IT and shut up already.

A textbook example of a non-notable MySpace band. Fails WP:BAND in a rather big way, on just about every single point. There's not much left to be said, but the plethora of redlinks on that page kinda sums up the situation Allie ^❤ 08:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Allie ^❤ 08:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

*Delete per nom. Although the article looks as though they may be worthy of an article (e.g. their album list), there's not one news article that I can spot that's actually about them. Shame, really, the article (redlinking and a couple of random gags aside) is actually better written than some notable band articles.. SMC (talk) 08:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

• Maybe I'm missing something, but this band had a major label album release on Sony (Whenever You're Ready released on Sony 550 and distributed by Epic Records [1]), and two album releases on Frontier Records which in its heyday was a not-insignificant punk rock indie label (Flop and the Fall of the Mopsqueezer! [2], World of Today [3]). Articles on the band from the Washington Post [4], Baltimore Sun [5], Worcester Daily News [6], and a paragraph in the Toronto Star [7]. Also they disbanded in 1995, so they should not be characterized as a MySpace band. If you throw on the single on the Hype! soundtrack released on Sub Pop in 1996 [8], I think this is a clearcut keep. -- Samir 08:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep. Agree with Samir, their releases qualify them for criterion 5 of WP:BAND. I especially like the geographic diversity of the press coverage (Baltimore, Toronto, Worcester MA) but they HAVE to be incorporated into the article, I'll do it tonight if no one else does. J04n(talk page) 11:07, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

• Keep, changed from delete - bugger! I knew there was something in that album list; that release alone gives them notability, and like I said, it's a nice article. SMC (talk) 15:38, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
• Keep per references found by Samir above. Robofish (talk) 16:41, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
• Keep perhaps a somewhat borderline case, but does pass WP:BAND. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 17:14, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
• Keep per the nice work and explanation by Samir. The band meets criteria 1 and 5 of WP:BAND.  Gongshow ^Talk 18:23, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

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.