Deletion of Død Beverte (2nd nomination)

Comment: This article cites reviews, interviews, and yes some press releases, but they are not the majority by any means, and I see no bias at all that would indicate that this article in created for promotion. I would also like to point out  does state an exception for books, films, and music. The different playlists are on the sites of separate radio stations, and I see no way the urls indicate that they aren't playlists, although it does look like they are from the same supplier, but many radio stations are owned by the same company, and many often have music supplied from the same source, saying they are the same is like saying all reviews are the same since at some point down the line they likely obtained the music from the same source, since the artist is at some point the source of their own music, and their label distributes it. Taking into account the tone of some of the editors that favor the article's deletion, I would question wether this deletion discussion was created aith|in good faith, and whether those same editors should be considered onflict|conflicts of interest -Special:Contributions/97.112.152.209|97.112.152.209
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions (WP:NOTINHERITED||WP:F||WP:C)

Comment: I was very disappointed to see that there was no consensus for deletion of Dethcentrik due to one editor not looking closely at the sources referenced. In particular there are a lot of sites which allow user submitted content and these can be used on wikipedia to stack a bunch of superficial references to add legitimacy to the topic. The same thing has certainly been done here. It is a clue when you see 15 references in the same place that someone is stacking in order to make up for the subject's general lack of notability. The article does not actually establish notability. I will note that it has been deleted before for this exact same reason. It is common for small-time uknown garage bands to create a wikipedia page for themselves in order to promote the band and give themselves a certain notoriety. This is just such an attempt at promotion, only with more meaningless references. Regardless of motives which cannot themselves constitute a viable reason for deletion, the article does not pass  or . Not notable. see Wikipedia:Masking the lack of notability, Wikipedia:Wikipuffery and especially Wikipedia:Bombardment
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BAND)