Deletion of Megan and Liz (4th nomination)

Comment: I agree with Herostratus here. You would think that with all the "buzz" that this group supposedly has, there would be more coverage of them by real reporters writing real articles that have to be approved by real editors. However, going back to the 2 sources provided by gongshow, http://www.nilesstar.com/2009/11/07/new-sensations-mace-sisters-appear-on-oprah-seek-record-deal/ this is a |supersource, http://long-island.newsday.com/kids/top-young-youtube-stars-come-to-westbury-1.2873203# this I'm not sure about, it seems to fall short of "significant coverage" but is more then a trivial mention (but it is Megan and Liz featured in the big honking photo at the top). Another supersource or 2 would really be helpful here
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything (WP:42||WP:42)

Comment: While I agree with the notion - presented in the earlier AfDs - that a musical act does not necessarily have to be signed to a major label and/or reach the charts in order to be notable, I'm not particularly persuaded by social media prominence (i.e. "fan following") alone being an exception to our guidelines. If there is substantial interest in a subject, then |reliable sources will have written about it. With that in mind, the best cases for significant coverage appear to be the articles in http://long-island.newsday.com/kids/top-young-youtube-stars-come-to-westbury-1.2873203# ExploreLI (''Newsday'') and the http://www.nilesstar.com/2009/11/07/new-sensations-mace-sisters-appear-on-oprah-seek-record-deal/ ''Niles Daily Star''. Any others
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS)

Comment: fails 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG)