Deletion of Andrew Jackson Jihad 2

Comment: potential but not up with 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: per PT.  I looked over the article and all the sources.  This article seems to meet the requirements in 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: I still see nothing that passes . Every newspaper mention is from that of some college where they played with the exception of the Phoenix New Times, which doesn't appear to be the most reliable of sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: I don't see a real consensus here. I would ask that we default to keep, for the time being, and allow the article to expand. While there is some disagreement about the notability of the sources, I feel a convincing case has been made for this band meeting parts of . Please allow time for more content, and for events to unfold that may change the minds of those who feel the band hasn't "done enough yet
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: No released albums, the "awards" are extremely minor, the coverage seems to be in local rags. Read the intent of , not the strict legalistic wording, as it was hardly written to legal rigor
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: The article has been rewritten (it is not a "re-creation of previously deleted material" because of the new content), because it meets OTHER criteria of  besides the album releases and charting requriements, which if you'd |bothered to read the article and the talk page, you would have discovered. The band has received more media coverage and awards since the last AfD, which I have cited in the new article. I have notified other editors about this article and its AfD as to gather more input for a clear consensus
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC||WP:OSTRICH)

Comment: per .  As for reliable sources, I really don't see one.  The ASU article is expressly out per : "Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...)."  The AZ Night Buzz is a blog.  And the College Times?  Definitely not something I would consider reliable.  The article in the Phoenix New Times is not displaying for me, so I am unable to judge the content of the article itself, but the publication as a whole is a local paper for a large city, but it is still not a far reaching paper, leaving its value rather limited as well.  Even if these articles were considered to be reliable sources, the next question is, would this band meet ?  They have not gone on a national tour.  They have toured a portion of the U.S.  They don't have two or more albums on a major label, no major music competition, no major award, they aren't getting radio time, and they don't have any independently notable members.  As for "Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or the local scene of a city...", I see nothing to support that argument, even with the sources given.  So with or without the sources given, I believe this band does not meet  and should be deleted
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: I am holding my vote too. This article is well referenced and written, but I am unsure about their notablity. Although there's no result of the band on All Music, but from the band's official website, they seemingly do go on national tours in a sense which should meet . AQu01rius
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)