Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mars Argo
Everyone above must avoid the  fallacy. The existence of, and quality of, articles on Poppy and Titanic Sinclair are irrelevant to the debate on this particular Mars Argo article. Also, don't forget . Meanwhile I have seen no pronouncements within the WP community that Noisey is ''not'' a reliable source. I could be wrong but there are other places to debate that matter. So I would conclude that the Noisey review at https://noisey.vice.com/en_au/article/6v7jdr/mars-argo-are-done-being-cool is at least partially valid, and there is another robust review from Consequence of Sound at https://consequenceofsound.net/2009/12/album-review-mars-argo-technology-is-a-dead-bird/. That might be enough for basic |notability but I think it's a bit of a stretch because otherwise this artist is mostly talked about in blogs
— User:doomsdayer520, 15:33, 27 March 2018 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS||WP:CIVIL||WP:GNG (Wikipedia:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions)