Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naked Truth (band) (3rd nomination)

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. ✗plicit 23:21, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Naked Truth (band)

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Lack of notability; not clear why this has been kept despite two previous nominations. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:11, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Georgia (U.S. state). Hey man im josh (talk) 15:21, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:17, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The two previous AfD discussions refer to sources named in the first deletion discussion. One source mentioned is the Guinness Encyclopedia of Popular Music. However, a search on Google Books suggests that the bands only has a single throwaway mention in the entire book. Also mentioned is the Encyclopedia of Popular Music, which mentions the band a single times in what again appears to be a throwaway mentioning without significant coverage of the band. There are three additions mentions of "Naked Truth" or "The Naked Truth", but those appear to be two films from 1957 and 1992, not the band. A user also brought up that the band apparently has released two albums with Sony Records, but I couldn't find any reliable secondary sources confirming that, or indicating notability of those albums. Kerrang, a magazine, apparently covered the band, but I was unable to find the respective article and/or confirm that their coverage there is significant.

The article received a refimprove tag in 2012, and in that decade, editors have failed to bring up sources that significantly cover the band. This article only seems to be around because of some single-line mentions in two books and .WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES Cortador (talk) 08:22, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:27, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I looked offline since coverage would predate the internet and found only a Melody Maker review. JSFarman (talk) 17:43, 20 September 2023 (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.