Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Heads Up!
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep. Mindspillage (spill yours?) 14:39, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
I honestly don't have the ability right now to research this one. Can some other folks check this one for notability, and if is notable, try and fix it up a bit. Donovan Ravenhull 15:07, 25 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Album from well-known, notable Canadian band Death From Above 1979. DoubleBlue (Talk) 00:06, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per DoubleBlue. If you don't have time, I'm not sure why you feel there's an urgent need to get articles on VfD right away. Add it to your watchlist and deal with it later, or just slap a
{{cleanup-importance}}on it, and wait a while. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 00:44, May 28, 2005 (UTC) - Delete. Firstly it's not an album, it's a six track EP. I dont know why DoubleBlue qouted a press release from the band's website with "notable" - well I guess you can believe anything. Sorry but this release isnt that notable for inclusion. Megan1967 02:17, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Band appears to be notable (they have a full-length album that's been reviewed at allmusic.com) and WikiProject Albums includes EPs: Lull (EP) and Airbag/How Am I Driving?, for examples. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 02:30, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
- So what? The article for VfD is the EP not the band. Read what I said. I never said the band wasn't notable - the band isnt up for VfD. The article for VfD is the EP not the band. Please explain why this release is notable - not the band. Megan1967 03:34, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It's a professionally-produced EP by a band that meets WP:MUSIC and has been covered in plenty of mainstream music press. That's enough for notability to me. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 03:48, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
- While the band may meet WP:MUSIC, the band is not up for VfD, the EP is. Megan1967 04:54, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps I haven't been clear enough. Here's my reasoning. 1) Band is notable per WP:MUSIC. 2) EPs by notable bands are notable. 3) Ergo, EP is notable. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 05:02, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Using that reasoning, every song by Death From Above 1979 should have its own article merely because Death From Above 1979 has some notability. Articles in wikipedia should stand on their own merits. So far I havent seen any reason why this particular EP is notable on its own. Megan1967 05:26, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Information about individual songs, if there's anything to say about them beyond their titles and running times, can be kept in the EP's article. Could we merge a band's entire discography into the band's article? Sure, but for many bands, this would make the article too big, and precedent is set by the (guessing here) thousands of articles on individual albums and EPs. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 05:38, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
- I can't imagine Death From Above 1979 having an exceedingly large biography all things considered. Megan1967 05:49, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Information about individual songs, if there's anything to say about them beyond their titles and running times, can be kept in the EP's article. Could we merge a band's entire discography into the band's article? Sure, but for many bands, this would make the article too big, and precedent is set by the (guessing here) thousands of articles on individual albums and EPs. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 05:38, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Using that reasoning, every song by Death From Above 1979 should have its own article merely because Death From Above 1979 has some notability. Articles in wikipedia should stand on their own merits. So far I havent seen any reason why this particular EP is notable on its own. Megan1967 05:26, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Perhaps I haven't been clear enough. Here's my reasoning. 1) Band is notable per WP:MUSIC. 2) EPs by notable bands are notable. 3) Ergo, EP is notable. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 05:02, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
- While the band may meet WP:MUSIC, the band is not up for VfD, the EP is. Megan1967 04:54, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- It's a professionally-produced EP by a band that meets WP:MUSIC and has been covered in plenty of mainstream music press. That's enough for notability to me. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 03:48, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
- So what? The article for VfD is the EP not the band. Read what I said. I never said the band wasn't notable - the band isnt up for VfD. The article for VfD is the EP not the band. Please explain why this release is notable - not the band. Megan1967 03:34, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Press release? I guess that means you didn't follow the link which links to 50+ reviews including MTV, The Toronto Star, Spin Magazine, Playboy.com, Chart Magazine, eye magazine, The Montreal Gazette, The Sun (UK), The Guardian, and NME. DoubleBlue (Talk) 02:40, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes press release. That's what the page is called and it's purpose. Megan1967 03:34, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- And...? You were the one who questioned why I linked it for notability. DoubleBlue (Talk) 03:58, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- When you verify an article for notability you do so with independent sources, not a band's press release, see What counts as a reputable publication. Megan1967 04:54, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Reputable publications: MTV, The Toronto Star, Spin Magazine, Playboy.com, Chart Magazine, eye magazine, The Montreal Gazette, The Sun (UK), The Guardian, and NME as in the link provided. DoubleBlue (Talk) 00:18, 9 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- When you verify an article for notability you do so with independent sources, not a band's press release, see What counts as a reputable publication. Megan1967 04:54, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- And...? You were the one who questioned why I linked it for notability. DoubleBlue (Talk) 03:58, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes press release. That's what the page is called and it's purpose. Megan1967 03:34, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Band appears to be notable (they have a full-length album that's been reviewed at allmusic.com) and WikiProject Albums includes EPs: Lull (EP) and Airbag/How Am I Driving?, for examples. AиDя01DTALKEMAIL 02:30, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, album (or near enough) from well-known band. Kappa 06:01, 28 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep, notable. —Xezbeth 06:03, May 28, 2005 (UTC)
- Delete notability of the EP not established. JamesBurns 03:49, 29 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete nn. Leanne 10:18, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep. Real release by real band. CJCurrie 21:47, 30 May 2005 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep real release by real band; as far as I know, the guiding policy for albums seems to be that if the band is notable enough to have an article, then their albums can have articles within the "albums" project. I don't buy the argument that individual songs are a comparable situation; it's easier to define what makes one song more notable than another (chart success, cultural context, etc.) than it is for albums, and song info merges into an album article much more easily than album info merges into a band bio. Bearcat 16:51, 1 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete --File:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 17:04, 2 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, notable release from notable band. Kafuffle 23:16, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. I'm trusting the above comments on the band's sufficient notability, albums by notable-enough bands get individual articles, and there is no reason to treat EPs differently from full length albums. Postdlf 23:20, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep, an EP from a notable band is notable itself. SeventyThree 23:27, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
Hidden category: