Deletion of Monsters Are Waiting

Comment: per the sources found by Bardin which appear to establish notability per 
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: Although the sources found by Bardin during this discussion are not overwhelming, they appear to meet the |reliable sources requirements to establish |notability per . This would have been a no brainer delete otherwise, so the nom is not unreasonable.  The editors wanting to keep or add content have the burden to establish notability and find RS. However, I run a quick google search before voting based on notability and references in AfDs.  The references do need to be added to the article
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Reliable sources (WP:RS||WP:N||WP:MUSIC)

Comment: If an article does not indicate notability, tag it with {{tl|notability}}. A poorly written article that only uses a myspace page as a reference should be tagged with {{tl|unreferenced}} or something similar. Neither are acceptable reasons for deletion. A very quick google search indicates that this subject is notable enough for an article on wikipedia per criteria 1 of . They have been the subject of multiple non-trivial mention in independent and reliable publications including http://www.allmusic.com/cg/amg.dll?p=amg&sql=10:fzfuxqtdldde this, http://www.amplifiermagazine.com/reviews/live/monsters_are_waiting_live.php this, http://www.snmag.com/content/view/142/211/ this and http://www.cordmag.com/031july2007/livemaximopark.php this. All that on just a quick google search. If you're not willing to spent just a single minute looking up a subject on google, then I really feel that you should not be nominating an article for deletion or voting delete
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)

Comment: article fails to establish notability as per 
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:MUSIC)