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 keep. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:00, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Desultory (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)

Subject fails WP:NBAND and WP:GNG. Two sources (of questionable reliability) don't pass the GNG line for me. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:56, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:56, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 22:56, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: it might be worth seeing if someone who speaks Swedish can identify any notability-establishing Swedish language sources. CJK09 (talk) 23:59, 12 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The best potential source would, at the top of my head, probably be Blod, eld, död: En svensk metalhistoria. Does someone have access to it and can see to which degree Desultory figures there? /Julle (talk) 21:48, 14 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: The band has received coverage from Aftonbladet, one of Sweden's largest newspapers, for some time. I've added two citations, which triples the number of sources now in the article, which isn't saying much. I'm neutral on whether the article is deleted or not. GetSomeUtah (talk) 14:50, 20 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Weak Keep - One review and two rated albums at AllMusic: http://www.allmusic.com/artist/desultory-mn0000247066/discography . Their biography there (http://www.allmusic.com/artist/desultory-mn0000247066/biography) is extremely terse. There are a few other refs in blogs and other sources, but their presence in the early Swedish death metal movement of the 90s, is an additional claim. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:26, 27 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete -- AllMusic is scraping the bottom of the barrel as far as music sources go. No indications that the band has a cult status or has made a significant impact on the industry or genre. K.e.coffman (talk) 09:18, 28 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -- Changing my position from neutral in the comment above. They have earned significant coverage by independent, reliable, authoritative sources, which point to a substantial fan base. "Cult" status is not required for notability. And, no, not every band has to "impact" the genre. Some bands just exist and make music, but this band has earned notability for its existence and, as commented upon by the sources, various persistent reincarnations. GetSomeUtah (talk) 18:56, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Three albums on Metal Blade satisfies criterion 5 of WP:NBAND, and coverage from Terrorizer, Allmusic, Blabbermouth.net, and in Daniel Ekeroth's book Swedish Death Metal gives them a pass of criterion 1, and it should be borne in mind that with metal bands, a lot of the coverage that exists often doesn't come up in Google searches as it's in print magazines. --Michig (talk) 06:31, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak Keep Information on Swedish subjects can be hard to find, I think there is enough findable proof of notability to assume it is notable in Sweden. A Guy into Books (talk) 09:07, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep but move to Desultory (band), and retarget this title to Superficiality, which is the primary topic of the term. bd2412 T 17:27, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep -- Michig makes a convincing case. Hopefully the article would get improved to the point that the notability is clearer. K.e.coffman (talk) 06:04, 6 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - enough notability established for WP:NBANDBabbaQ (talk) 13:35, 9 September 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.