Decadent (band) : So we have a band.  Formed.  Disbanded soon after.  Recorded an album.  Nominated for an award.  Didn't win.  No chart placement, no enduring impact or influence.  No critical reception.  No notability.  Fails WP:GNG, WP:BAND.  And, yes, a WP:BEFORE shows some initial press release derived music media coverage and nothing whatsoever beyond that.  Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 16:18, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and Korea .  Alexandermcnabb ( talk ) 16:18, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of South Korea-related deletion discussions .  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 17:04, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : Two of the sources in my view are significant enough coverage to pass GNG and thus make it a notable subject.  Wikipedia doesn't care about how long a subject was around for or what the critical reception was.  Macktheknifeau ( talk ) 17:25, 28 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep : There are already reliable sources, and even if they don't win major awards, they can prove their notability by nominations.  This is written in WP:MN .  And they also have news that they won first place a major music competition.  (Paragraph 9 of WP:MN ).  Even if the band broke up after only three years of formation, the duration of their activities itself doesn't matter.  (If there are sources that can prove their notability) 올해의수상자 ( talk ) 01:04, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Wait--you mean the "the Penta Super Rookie" award?  Come on.  Drmies ( talk ) 01:45, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] It is a competition hosted by Incheon .  And WP:MN paragraph 8 says that even a nomination for a major award can prove its notability.  But rather, I don't know why you describe it as “no award” 올해의수상자 ( talk ) 01:58, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And UPDATE - 2018 EBS Hello Rookie mentioned in the article is also a major competition, and there's the source that they came in third place.  I’ll add this later 올해의수상자 ( talk ) 02:53, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Things don't become "major awards" just because you say so.  Drmies ( talk ) 13:05, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't know how to answer this… You know that most people here said the Korean Music Awards as a major award, right?  올해의수상자 ( talk ) 23:29, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] 올해의수상자 , please don't do that passive-aggressive stuff: we're not on Facebook, so that whole "you know that...right?" is uncalled for--thank you. You haven't mentioned that award here: we were talking, I thought, about the "Penta Super Rookie Award", and you brought up the "EBS Hello Rookie Award", neither of which appear to be noteworthy. And with that one nomination, you have a band that meets one of the criteria--and please note that the guideline doesn't say "is notable if it meets one of the criteria".  It says may .  Drmies ( talk ) 01:27, 1 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Hello, Drmies .  First of all, EBS Hello Rookie is not an award, but a competition.  If you're going to check that, that's no. 9, not no.  8. Of course, it should be left to each person to judge it as a major competition, but I mentioned it as a major competition, noting that it was hosted by a national institution in Korea and that the competition was broadcast on major broadcasts in Korea.  And the user who originally opened the discussion said, "This band was nominated for a major award, but it was failed in WP:Band because they didn't win," and I'm saying this isn't true.  I know you edited the Wikipedia for a long time, I respect that part of you, and you left your opinion based on it.  Anyway, the sentence that I started with "You know" might be a little informal, but when you said "That doesn't change just because you said that so" it felt like you were ignoring me (Because I didn't write it in my subjectively, but I wrote it with Wikipedia guidelines and some grounds.), and I was just saying it in a little angry tone, too.  (Of course not as much as you, but I've also edited a lot of articles in Wikipedia, and I know the guidelines enough.)  I apologise if my words were a little aggressive, but I would like to say to you that your were also a little aggressive for me.  Anyway, I think the article meets the conditions if any one of those WP:Band guidelines are applicable, but I think three are (1, 8, 9).  And there's a reason why I wrote about it earlier.  올해의수상자 ( talk ) 03:39, 1 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Simply not notable.  No two albums on a major label, no hits, no awards, nothing really per GNG besides minor coverage.  Drmies ( talk ) 01:08, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I proved somethings with the guidelines of WP:MN .  No label and no hit, you are right, but not the other two.  올해의수상자 ( talk ) 04:55, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nom and Drmies's reasoning.  To the deletion reviewer, I would be happy for a weak keep if there is charting on SK national chart (i.e. Circle Chart ) or on Billboard charts in SK or other countries and/or there is winning of a actual major awards of which there isn't other than absurd article creation of "major competition" as counterargument.  — Paper9oll ( 🔔 • 📝 ) 04:37, 29 September 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, Hey man im josh ( talk ) 16:48, 5 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  It appears, by sources now in the article, that WP:NBAND#C1 /GNG is met.  Such sources include [1] [2] [3] .  Note that it seems like the album is also notable, but since they only had one major album might as well follow NOPAGE and keep it all in one article.  — siro χ o 22:00, 5 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.  Relisting comment: Relisting.  Looking like a No consensus closure right now.  Very divided opinion on this band.  Please add new comments below this notice.  Thanks, L iz Read!  Talk!  23:44, 12 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete .  Per Drmies' reasoning.  The band's demonstrated notability isn't there, and neither does it seem that the awards/accolades it has are suitable enough to demonstrate its notability.  GuardianH ( talk ) 04:51, 13 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] This band was definitely a popular band in Korea in the late 2010s, and of course, it was limited to Korea, and it is right to have a source that they were famous in order to prove that they were famous.  However, I can't see why they say they're not famous even if they bring a reliable source according to the part required by WP:Band .  Not everyone can have knowledge of articles, which is why there are guidelines like WP:Band .  When I just say "they're famous" it's not credible, so I'm showing it with reliable sources.  But I'm showing they're famous in South Korean indie scene, with reliable sources and awards, but it's not right to comment on deleting simply.  올해의수상자 ( talk ) 02:03, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] I thought this was enough, but Now I've added more reliable sources.  I thought everyone would say keep because the band's notability conditions are met, but I didn't know the discussion would be this long.  올해의수상자 ( talk ) 02:40, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The sources to add today are reliable sources (4 or 5 I think), especially in the case of Seojeongmingab and Lee Kyeongjoon are professional music critics (you can see the articles like [4] , and [5] , This article supports that they are influential critics in Korea), and they both are committee of the Korean Music Awards .  올해의수상자 ( talk ) 02:52, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : I lived in South Korea during their time of fame, and I know they are a famous band in the late 2010s.  So I added some reliable sources to the article today.  Also, EBS Hello Rookie Contest is an major influential competition in South Korean indie (you can see it in the article), so I think this part should also be included in the WP:Band criteria.  올해의수상자 ( talk ) 03:07, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] For everyone information, OP was the one that created EBS Hello Rookie Contest btw so Drmies' reasoning above make sense now.  They can't just say it's "major" just because they created an article and/or an article already exists so it automatically become "major" lol.  Just my thoughts.  — Paper9oll ( 🔔 • 📝 ) 06:19, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Paper9oll It's not just because the article was made.  I'll talk about why this competition can be considered a major.  1. This competition is hosted by a state agency.  2. The competition is broadcast on South Korea's major broadcasting stations.  3. Every year, the competition is covered in a reliable sources, like news To sum up, it's "a competition hosted by a public institution, broadcast live, recognised and influential."  Even if one of these conditions is met, people usually say it's a major competition.  But it has all three.  This doesn't make sense if it's not a major competition.  올해의수상자 ( talk ) 06:24, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] And he didn't know much about this competition.  And when he and I talked, this article itself didn't exist.  Then I would like to judge again, @ Drmies 올해의수상자 ( talk ) 06:27, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Fyi, my comments is NOT a reply to your comments.  Nor did " when he and I talked " happened nor am I interested on such.  — Paper9oll ( 🔔 • 📝 ) 06:30, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] You don't have to answer it 올해의수상자 ( talk ) 06:41, 14 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment And, chart can't be the only criterion in Korean indie music.  Korean music charts have always been criticized for not properly reflecting marketability and for being too vulnerable to hoarding and marketing outside of music.  (You can find this criticism at the following these links [6] [7] [8] )  And, that's why "K-Indie chart" have actually been created for the indie music market since 2020 ( [9] ).  Of course, I agree with that charts are also one of the reflections of popularity, so I'm not saying this is wrong, but I'd like to say that indie bands are hard to judge their reputation by just the "charts".  That is why I am referring to reliable sources, major award nominations and major competition.  It's all included in WP: Band .  It is a sad reality that I have to put forward only this part to prove the reputation of indie musicians, but there is not much information about Korean indie in English Wikipedia, and I think this part should be pioneered.  올해의수상자 ( talk ) 03:16, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : I'll write down a description of the source.  There are major and minor references here, but I think it met for WP:Band .  And I wrote the words "major competition" and "prominent professional music critic," and I also prepared a link to them to show that they are often judged that way in Korea, not that I unilaterally claim.  1. [10] Major reference - an interview with the band.  2. [11] Minor reference - this is a critical article about rock festivals in 2019, where a very small reference of the last festival they planned just before disbanding.  3. [12] The record they were nominated for the 2019 Korean Music Awards  4. [13] Major reference - an article about them, interviews with them as well.  5. [14] Major reference - Herald Corporation article, featuring them.  6. [15] Major reference - article by webzine Weiv , and the writer Na Wonyoung is a prominent professional music critic.  (link with reference to him (Na Wonyoung) [16] [17]  ) 7. [18] Controversial - main or minor references depend on people's judgment.  This is an introduction to Marie Claire 's 2017 Korean indie albums.  8. [19] Minor reference - article about the Pentaport Rock Festival Super Rookie final winning 3 teams performing at Pentaport Rock Festival.  It's an article that the band is one of those three teams, and the reference isn't long.  9. [20] Major reference - a band-themed article.  And Seojeongmingab, who wrote the article, is a prominent music critic.  (link with reference to him (Seojeongmingab) [21] [22] [23]  ) 10. [24] Controversial - main or minor references depend on people's judgment.  One of their songs was made into a stop-motion music video, and there is an explanation about it.  11. [25] Minor reference - about the EBS Hello Rookie Contest they participated in, but not too long  12. [26] Major reference - also about the EBS Hello Rookie Contest they participated in.  There's a long story about them.  Of course it's up to people to decide whether to judge for a major competition, but I would say this is a major competition based on the reasons I wrote it down.  (The source that this competition can be seen as a major competition [27] [28]  ) 13. [29] Minor reference - this is an article about the solo career of a band vocalist.  The reference to the band is not long.  14. [30] The record they were nominated for the 2020 Korean Music Awards 올해의수상자 ( talk ) 09:18, 15 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  This is a borderline case.  Interviews with the band are not independent from the subject and do not contribute to meeting notability guidelines, so a lot of the in-depth sources presented in the article are not helpful in that aspect.  However, while only an essay but often cited to make a case of notablity, I think WP:THREE is satisfied here.  First, the VOP reference is six paragraphs dedicated to Decadent's career and the evolution of its musical style.  Second, there's the Herald Economy .  The second half is an interview with the band, but the first eight paragraphs are an introduction written by the journalist.  Third, Weiv is another piece that delves into the band's musical style to a degree significant enough that I believe meets the threshold of "significant coverage".  This seems like enough to satisfy any concerns about notability.  ✗ plicit 02:48, 20 October 2023 (UTC) [ reply ] The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.  Please do not modify it.  Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review ).  No further edits should be made to this page.

Discussion outcome: no consensus