Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mammal Hands
I'm still unsure exactly what opinion I have here, but I'm leaning towards keep. My perception of the article is admittedly biased by the fact that I've seen hundreds of articles on bands and musicians which are far more trivial, and have far less comprehensive sourcing/ support for notability than this one. I also think that while a single local interest news source doesn't provide weight to notability, several local interest sources from across the UK do (they're obviously not a local band which is being covered, but rather local news is covering them for their notability, is the way I see it.) This in combination with the article in Jazzwise to me provides a sufficient sourcing basis. Beyond that, I also think that Gondwana records qualifies as a more significant indie label, as they've been operating for many years and the other bands under their label more easily pass the criteria for notability than Mammal Hands does, and per  recording several albums for a large indie label is also a claim to notability. The combination of these factors along with the fact that while appropriately uncited in the article, there are many listings online for their performances at large venues and festivals, is enough for me to think that this band is sufficiently notable, and that this notability is supported almost well-enough within the article. This is the rationale behind my hesitant keep vote
— User:Zortwort, 16:36, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NMUSIC (Wikipedia:Notability)