Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Poppy Girls

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. (non-admin closure) Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:01, 22 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Poppy Girls

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

I've been thinking about this for a while, and what clinched it for me is that an IP has recently started adding WP:BLP-violating content to the article. I think that, as we are dealing with minors, we should write an article about the song and include just a summary of the girls there, preferably one that doesn't use the Daily Mail as a source. Laun chba ller 23:19, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. ///EuroCarGT 23:28, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. ///EuroCarGT 23:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ///EuroCarGT 23:29, 15 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Subjects clearly meet WP:MUSBIO. Not sure what their ages or the Daily Mail have to do with anything. -Ad Orientem (talk) 02:54, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. They're likely only to be notable for the one song and album, but they did chart (album and the single) and there is coverage. I'd say that it's better to have an article for the group and expand the article to discuss the song in more depth than it would be to have an article about the specific song. The thing to remember about articles about minors is that we tend to only delete articles or focus on other things when the article itself would be harmful for them. In this particular instance they're known for something fairly good. It'd be different if we were writing about say, a teenager who was known for throwing a particular destructive party or was known for being abused in some way. That's the situation where we'd invoke the "no harm to minors" thing and either delete it outright or make it into a small subsection in an article (and not name names). The point is that the names of these children were deliberately made public for publicity and with the consent of their parents. It's a different situation entirely. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:35, 16 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Tokyogirl79's rationale. Info on the group's charting single and album can appropriately be contained within the article, which appears to meet WP:MUSICBIO. Gongshow talk 17:47, 22 April 2014 (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.