Deletion of Critical Mass (band)

Comment: the article is greatly improved over the version that was previously deleted.  I still have reservations about the award (being "equivalent to" a much bigger and more well-known award does not imply "the same as" the bigger award when it comes to notability--the San Francisco Bay Area "Bammie" awards are equivalent to the Grammies, but far from being the same when it comes to notability).  And most minor indie labels hook up with big distributors (or they don't survive), so having a big distributor is ''in no way'' equivalent to being on a "major label or important indie" (which is what  asks for).  But even with those and a couple of other more dubious claims to notability discounted, they do seem to meet the notability requirements.  Barely, perhaps, but barely is all that's asked for.  And, more importantly, |verifiability seems to be established
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:BAND||WP:V)

Comment: as failing |verifiability and not meeting  criteria. The creator had 48 hours to provide sources. There are still no sources
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Verifiability (WP:V||WP:BAND)

Comment: As I see it, there are two issues that could cause deletion here; 1. repost of deleted content, 2. conflict of interest.  When I saw it on NP patrol I marked it as speedy for the reposting issue, but looking at the previous AFD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Critical Mass (rock band)|here) it looked to me like it should have been re-listed to generate a larger consensus.  After talking with the article's creator and actually ''reading'' the article I became convinced that this article does indeed meet usic.  When the article's creator assured me that he could add reliable sources to the article I figured that, once that was done it would be enough to negate the repost issue, though the conflict of interest issue remains.  Conflict of interest is a serious problem, but with Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Doug Bell|a recently promoted admin who wrote an article about himself when he was new, I figured it wasn't all ''that'' big of a deal.  I see now that
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Mediation (WP:M)

Comment: as |conflict of interest, fails , recreation of deleted material, etc., etc
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest (WP:COI||WP:BAND)