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 Cogent reasons have been given for deletion, and nobody has put forward a "keep" argument. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:14, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Spellblast (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)

No reason to consider them notable, only reference self published & can't see anything of worth when I google them. TheLongTone (talk) 16:00, 22 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete for failing WP:ENTERTAINER, WP:NMUSIC, WP:MUSIC, etc. Qworty (talk) 09:07, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I only created the Battlecry page because I noticed that it was redlinked, and I can only assume if Spellblast and Battlecry don't meet NMUSIC and etc mentioned above, then I can only assume Horns of Silence and Ray of Time don't meet them either? (The Iron Turtle 09:26, 23 October 2012 (UTC))[reply]
  • That's WP:OTHERCRAP. Qworty (talk) 19:06, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not really other stuff exists: its a justifiction for having written this article, and a fair one. The implication is that if the band is non-notable, its recordings are also non-notable (which I believe to be the case). A new article was recently created on one of these: following the linked band name I thought that they were not notable, & so AFD the band, which clears the way to PROD or CSD the articles on the individual recordings. TheLongTone (talk) 19:55, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:54, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 22:54, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 05:22, 29 October 2012 (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.