Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Brain Trauma
When it comes to music and books, my history proves I lean towards inclusionist-views, however we DO have a guideline, , that all bands and artists articles need to meet.  They may be a great band and if they had some MP3s of their music I'd be more than happy to listen to them, but for wikipedia...they don't 'make the cut'.  That is '''NOT''' saying anything about their music, fans, band members, or act nor does that somehow make them less of a group.  It simple means that certain guildlines were set by the wikipedia editors as to what the 'cut off' line was for bands.    Just like Billboard's top 100 qualifications to get on their list, wikipedia has qualifications that need to be meet to have an article.  On a side note: Freedom of Speech does not apply to Wikipedia or the Internet. Most servers on the 'net are privately owned and that means the owners can censor anything you post on their server.  I'd be all for this article...IF they could be proven to meet  and have at least three (multiple) Independent, Reliable, Reputable, Non-trivial, Third-Party sources. Articles about the band (and nothing else but the band) by major magazines, newspapers, or peer-reviewed journals
— User:Bschott, 16:01, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:MUSIC||WP:MUSIC (Wikipedia:Notability)