Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bougenvilla
Out of 24 footnotes in the article, more than half of them are to their songs' sales pages on iTunes — which is not a |reliable source that can carry notability in a Wikipedia article — and none of the remaining nine are any better, being entirely to |blogs and  concert listings and more |primary sources like SoundCloud. This is ''not'' the kind of sourcing it takes to get a musical group into Wikipedia. Deletion does ''not'' mean that a band can ''never'' have an article, because an article ''can'' be recreated again if and when somebody can do ''better'' on substance and sourcing than the first time — but no, we don't keep articles just because they ''might'' eventually be improvable. We have an ''extremely'' high rate of people who try to misuse Wikipedia as a public relations venue, and that can't be tolerated or accepted — if the article doesn't already meet our inclusion and sourcing standards ''now'', it can't stay
— User:Bearcat, 04:59, 16 October 2016 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:BLOGS||WP:ROUTINE||WP:PRIMARYSOURCES (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)