Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ten Floors
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. 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.
The result was Baleet.. --Luigi30 (Taλk) 13:09, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
A non-notable band. I nominated for speedy and another editor removed the tag. The only claim to notability in the article is playing in front of 30,000 people, and that is not sourced. Also, the wikilinks under studio albums and singles are not related to the band. Cyrus Andiron 14:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, nonnotable band. NawlinWiki 15:08, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - they have a claim for notability under WP:MUSIC #9 - "Has won or placed in a major music competition". They have coverage in the local press [1][2][3]. Whether or not this is enough I'm not entirely sure. Darksun 16:40, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Some additional sources - Channel 4, more from the local press, [4][5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darksun (talk • contribs) 16:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The battle of the bands was a local competition for a radio station, as explained in the article itself. Also, the sources being presented are all local newpspaers or publications. Those are not exactly reliable sources. They have not had extensive coverage outside of the city that they live in. That is not an assertion of notability. [6] - This says that they are unsigned, they do not even have a record contract.--Cyrus Andiron 17:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Nothing in the reliable sources guidelines suggest that a local paper isn't a reliable source. Topics on Wikipedia do not need to be globally or even nationally notable, there are plenty of 'local interest' articles, provided they have multiple sources it doesn't nessecarily matter whether they're only known within a certain 'scene'. Darksun 17:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Stated above is the incorrect statement that the Battle of the Band contest in question was local. This is incorrect as the contest was regional, therefore on much larger scale, with multiple reliable sources to confirm notability. Despite these sources being local, the sources show this competition was larger than a local scale. Also notability does include bands that are unsigned, as this is not criteria for every stage of a band's notability. The fact that the band is unsigned does not deter from the notability of the page, the sources/references on it, nor does it detract from a single being released in November produced by a major music industry player. (Source pending). Jackgnic 18:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment They have still not met any of the criteria in WP:MUSIC. The battle of the bands that they won was supposedly regional, but only covered by local press. I don't consider that winning a major performance (criterion #9) considering the fact that the event did not have a name and weas sponsored by a local radio station. Their single is due to be released in Novemeber, but that is not verified or sourced. The statement that they are working with another band member is also unsourced. These guys are nothing more than an unsigned high school band. They do not have a notable album or single and they have never been on tour. The only external links on the page go to myspace, hardly a reliable source for anything. --Cyrus Andiron 18:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- The Battle of the Bands contest has a name - The Pulse of West Yorkshire Battle of the Bands. It was covered regionally by the radio station, but the minisite has since gone offline as a new year as taken place. It was covered in depth regionally on air on the radio to a listenership of thousands, but this cannot be referenced as a written article as it was aired live to the region. The event was not sponsored by a regional radio station. The event was ran, organised, judged, broadcasted, and covered by the regional radio station. I have also afforementioned the sources are pending for the Mickey Dale connection and the single release, due to be confirmed within the next 7-10 working days in other citable sources. As mentioned in the artical, the band are on tour at the moment in support of their single release. Single release reference pending. These references will however only back up the point that the artical does confirm to criterion #9 as the contest was major, even if the citable sources are local. Local publications cover regional press on a daily basis. Added now to the page include sources for a previous album release.Jackgnic 20:12, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment They have still not met any of the criteria in WP:MUSIC. The battle of the bands that they won was supposedly regional, but only covered by local press. I don't consider that winning a major performance (criterion #9) considering the fact that the event did not have a name and weas sponsored by a local radio station. Their single is due to be released in Novemeber, but that is not verified or sourced. The statement that they are working with another band member is also unsourced. These guys are nothing more than an unsigned high school band. They do not have a notable album or single and they have never been on tour. The only external links on the page go to myspace, hardly a reliable source for anything. --Cyrus Andiron 18:43, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Stated above is the incorrect statement that the Battle of the Band contest in question was local. This is incorrect as the contest was regional, therefore on much larger scale, with multiple reliable sources to confirm notability. Despite these sources being local, the sources show this competition was larger than a local scale. Also notability does include bands that are unsigned, as this is not criteria for every stage of a band's notability. The fact that the band is unsigned does not deter from the notability of the page, the sources/references on it, nor does it detract from a single being released in November produced by a major music industry player. (Source pending). Jackgnic 18:31, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Nothing in the reliable sources guidelines suggest that a local paper isn't a reliable source. Topics on Wikipedia do not need to be globally or even nationally notable, there are plenty of 'local interest' articles, provided they have multiple sources it doesn't nessecarily matter whether they're only known within a certain 'scene'. Darksun 17:26, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The battle of the bands was a local competition for a radio station, as explained in the article itself. Also, the sources being presented are all local newpspaers or publications. Those are not exactly reliable sources. They have not had extensive coverage outside of the city that they live in. That is not an assertion of notability. [6] - This says that they are unsigned, they do not even have a record contract.--Cyrus Andiron 17:15, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Some additional sources - Channel 4, more from the local press, [4][5] —Preceding unsigned comment added by Darksun (talk • contribs) 16:54, 20 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Wknight94 (talk) 11:21, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Strong Delete - Non-notable local band. No touring, no charting, 3 figure sales on their recorded music. Winners of a non-notable local ("regional" is really pushing it as the "region" is limited to a part of Yorkshire) competition. They are basically a school band who do local gigs and who've won some money and invested it into employing a producer. The references are puff pieces in local rags, not the material of encyclopaedias. ---- WebHamster 12:41, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I concur with Cyrus Andiron that the contest does not appear to be major. A google search for the contest only yields 11 hits, none of which (unless I've missed something) are reliable. I was checking to see if they were notable for the World Jam appearance, but while World Jam is a common name for a festival, combining the name and locate was not helpful. The two articles sourced do not seem to me to satisfy the criterion of "multiple non-trivial published works". They may be poised on notability, but they don't seem to be there yet. --Moonriddengirl 12:46, 27 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as per Webhamster. Stifle (talk) 20:43, 28 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Retain Sources now added for credibility of the single release, the single release having being officially produced by Mickey Dale of Embrace fame, the single being out in November, and references include articals that mention the band opening World Jam festival for 30,000 at Chelmsford Park. More sources to be added within a couple of days. Sources can be local and still notable; just because a source is local doesn't mean it doesn't conform to Wikipedia standard. All sources now conform to notability for the entry to evade deletion, with more sources to come. Jackgnic (talk) 15:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: Having just gone through all the references to format them correctly and to remove or multi-ref duplicates (as well as some vandal reverting along the way) I can state that none of the references stand up. They are either press releases or self submitted (PNG Marketing giving instructions?), and the 2 that aren't are just puff pieces in the local rag. There is nothing independent there. How about some nationals? Or something in one of the major music rags? And come on, do you really think a CD giveaway competition in a local freebie paper is a reliable, substantial and non-trivial citation? And do you really think a sound sample is a good idea for real music fans to listen to? Shudder! ---- WebHamster 15:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: As far as I recalll Wikipedia doesn't really do this sort of thing. Seriously, however, no sources, so fails WP:Music instantly. A1octopus 17:08, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for the correct referencing - I have taken note and will do it in this format from now onwards. First note: you have incorrected sourced that the paper is a local 'freebie' paper. This is not a freebie paper, and I would not source from a freebie paper. This is plain to see. "And do you really think a sound sample is a good idea for real music fans to listen to? Shudder!" I'm sorry, but what?! Does that sentence make sense without explanation? You need larger sources in addition to the ones already presented? I will source these shortly and put them on Wikipedia, then we can finish this finally. Jackgnic (talk) 22:01, 2 October 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.104.181.148 (talk) [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.