Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 January 25: Difference between revisions
→List of algal culture collections: argument |
→Comsec Consulting Ltd.: close: original deletion endorsed, but recreation allowed |
||
Line 253: | Line 253: | ||
|} |
|} |
||
====[[:Comsec Consulting Ltd.]]==== |
====[[:Comsec Consulting Ltd.]] (closed)==== |
||
{| class="navbox collapsible collapsed" style="text-align: left; border: 0px; margin-top: 0.2em;" |
|||
|- |
|||
! style="background-color: #f2dfce; font-weight:normal; text-align:left;" | |
|||
* '''[[:Comsec Consulting Ltd.]]''' – '''deletion endorsed, recreation allowed'''. The original deletion was endorsed, but the new version (substantially improved) is in mainspace at [[Comsec Consulting]]. – [[User:Aervanath|Aervanath]] ([[User talk:Aervanath|talk]]) 15:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC) <!--*--> |
|||
|- |
|||
| style="text-align:center;" | ''The following is an archived debate of the [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]] of the article above. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>'' |
|||
|- |
|||
| style="border: solid 1px silver; padding: 8px; background-color: white;" | |
|||
{{drvlinks|pg=Comsec Consulting Ltd.|ns=Article}}<tt>)</tt> |
{{drvlinks|pg=Comsec Consulting Ltd.|ns=Article}}<tt>)</tt> |
||
Line 300: | Line 308: | ||
******I think you will find that I have presented a userspace draft :) Here is it agains: [[User:Shar1R/Comsec temporary page]]. Scroll up a little to the ''request'' under the horizontal line, please. [[User:Timtrent|Fiddle Faddle]] ([[User talk:Timtrent|talk]]) 23:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC) |
******I think you will find that I have presented a userspace draft :) Here is it agains: [[User:Shar1R/Comsec temporary page]]. Scroll up a little to the ''request'' under the horizontal line, please. [[User:Timtrent|Fiddle Faddle]] ([[User talk:Timtrent|talk]]) 23:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC) |
||
* '''Endorse''' [[WP:CSD#G11]] applies here. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 22:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC) |
* '''Endorse''' [[WP:CSD#G11]] applies here. <b>[[User Talk:JzG|Guy]]</b> <small>([[User:JzG/help|Help!]])</small> 22:29, 28 January 2009 (UTC) |
||
|- |
|||
| style="text-align:center;" | ''The above is an archive of the [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]] of the page listed in the heading. <span style="color:red;">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span>'' |
|||
|} |
Revision as of 15:01, 30 January 2009
Deadstar Assembly (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD))
Band_VERY_valid DeadstarAssembly (talk) 02:37, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- The band was deleted as not being notable, per our guidelines for musical groups. Do you have something which shows how they fit those guidelines? — The Hand That Feeds You:Bite 08:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- On the deletion review page, there is an instruction "Deletion Review is to be used where someone is unable to resolve the issue in discussion with the administrator (or other editor) in question. This should be attempted first – courteously invite the admin to take a second look". I haven't noticed this discussion taking place. While I'm aware that some users consider this an optional step, I would appreciate if the nominator could please explain why he omitted it (or, if there was a discussion that I missed, point it out)? Stifle (talk) 09:20, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I have tried reviewing it with the administrator who deleted it and found that even providing hundreds of links that proove the bands standing wouldn't be enough for him, so he had suggested to do it via this method. So here's a shortened version of the information I have provided to him:
The group have been around for 8 years and have appeared numerous times in publications both digital and print globally including such magazines as Zillo (germany), and Metal edge (United states). Also having toured the United States over a dozen times in that span, been sampled on numerous TV shows for stations such as VH1, MTV, and even ABC family, and have a pending release of its 3rd globally available album (retail, not only online), airplay on a global level on both satellite and air-broadcast radio, I would assume these would qualify them for a few of the criteria listed on the wikipedia's page of terms.
Below you will find a listing of just a fraction of the bands mention -
The bands listing on MTV http://www.mtv.com/music/artist/deadstar_assembly/artist.jhtml
Proof of the bands contribution to a major video game http://projectgothamracing3.com/gothammusic/Soundtrack+Samples.htm
Major music label #1 http://www.purerecords.com/
Major music label #2 (international) http://www.dockyard1.com/deadstar/
Proof of the bands endorsement with BC Rich Guitars http://www.bcrich.com/artists.asp
Proof of the bands endorsement with Kustom Amplifiers http://www.kustom.com/artist_main.aspx
Proof of the bands endorsement with SnapJack Cables http://www.zzyzxsnapjack.com/artists.html
Proof of the bands endorsement with DDRums (Under artists section) http://www.ddrum.com/main2.php
Proof of the bands endorsement with HotPicks USA http://www.hotpicksusa.com/artists.cfm
Proof of the bands inclusion (the cover no less) if a German Magazine called "zillo" https://www.zillo.de/cgi-bin/zillo2/shop/cgi/show_artikel.cgi?nextpage_params=&artikel=mag052006&prevpage=&pattern=&start=1&lang=deutsch&artikelid=&session=&warengruppe=64&pattern_ir=&nextpage=
(go to www.zillo.de to confirm the magazine as being not run via the band or an individual blog owner) —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeadstarAssembly (talk • contribs) 09:47, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Partial list of the bands touring history (Sadly unable to parse 8 years of touring data) http://www.deadstar.com/tour/past_dates.php
Amazon.com http://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_gw?url=search-alias%3Daps&field-keywords=deadstar+assembly&x=0&y=0
Simple google search for a review of the bands last album http://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-a&rls=org.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial&channel=s&hl=en&q=deadstar+assembly+unsaved+reviews&btnG=Google+Search
Bands large list of videos on youtube (some with almost 200k views per) http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query=deadstar+assembly&aq=-1&oq=
Bands listing on Rolling stone http://www.rollingstone.com/reviews/album/10748864/unsaved
List of articles on blabbermouth (a major label run music blog) http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Search&searchtext=deadstar+assembly&x=0&y=0
I can provide more if it would help show the standing of the group. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeadstarAssembly (talk • contribs) 09:29, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- I can't see any discussions with the administrator in your contributions. Can you point out where they took place? Stifle (talk) 09:46, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Via email correspondence.
- This is the deleting admin. I can confirm that I was contacted by e-mail regarding this deletion, but I have not had time to review the last three e-mails I received, and will not be able to until this afternoon or this evening. I will outline my justification for deletion (and my decision to decline restoration) at that time, but for now, admins can view the article through the deleted history. What I deleted was an unreferenced wreck, which had already been previously deleted twice before, including an AFD which closed as a speedy delete. Horologium (talk) 14:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Any mainstream media coverage? Stifle (talk) 15:34, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Note — above account has been indefed for being a promotion-only account here. MuZemike 18:24, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Deleting admin's response: To answer Stifle's question, there doesn't appear to be much mainstream coverage, but there is a lot of non-notable webzine reviews and the like. The number of GHits for the band is substantial, but it's mostly fancruft. (Almost all of the reviews are to 'zines which lack Wikipedia articles). There is a cursory review of their second album at About.com ([1]) and a review at Blogcritics ([2]), but I didn't find anything else that was worthwhile. (There are a lot of lists which prove that the band exists, but nothing other than track listings and lists of the members of the band (all monosyllabic stage names, no real names anywhere). The MTV link cited above is nothing more than a scrape of the Allmusic mini-bio of the group. The only really notable factoid is the inclusion of one of their songs on the soundtrack to Project Gotham Racing 3; everything else only confirms that they exist, not that they are notable. FWIW, there is an article on de.wiki for Zillo, so that may be something worth pursuing. My two dozen word German vocabulary is not going to be worth much; perhaps a German speaker can take a look.
- I should also point out that in his initial request for restoration, the user's rationale was: Sadly we are unable to find the exact reason for these actions [the deletions], and request that all deleted material be re-posted as soon as possible as it is a vital source of information used by the fanbase to keep up to date on the band activities. I directed him to points four and five of WP:SOAP, which address self-promotion and advertising. The band's MySpace and Facebook pages are appropriate as a way for fans to keep track of the band; Wikipedia is not.
- I will be dropping a note on the blocked user's talkpage encouraging him to create an account with a non-promotional username; I don't feel right about blocking him during a discussion, even though I stand by my original deletion of the articles on the band and its three albums.It just seems a bit petty to indef block him straightaway, although the username needed to be changed. Horologium (talk) 21:13, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Zillo is a German based print magazine, thus why it was listed as a viable source of mainstream recognition (maybe not an American mainstream, but in Germany it has been running for over 2 decades). There are several other publications of which the group have been featured in both nationally and internationally, but since they are all print, there are no digital reproductions of them on the magazines websites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 21:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Can you specify the titles and the issues? If they are notable, they will be archived in libraries, and the articles can be verified. It appears that you are not differentiating between mentions of the band and coverage of the band, which are two different things. Mentions of the band are fine if one is trying to establish that the band exists; we're past that—everyone agrees that the band exists. However, there is no discussion of the band in reliable sources; the Rolling Stone link you provided above has no discussion of the band, only a listing of the songs on the album (which was not reviewed by the magazine). The touring list is from the band's website, not a valid source; nor is the YouTube channel. The handful of mentions at the blabbermouth site are undermined by the disclaimer at the bottom stating that it is not affiliated with Roadrunner Records, and they are not responsible for any of its content. All of the links you provide for "endorsements" simply show that the band exists; they don't discuss the band at all.
- A recent deletion discussion was Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Rocket to the Moon, another band. Like Deadstar Assembly, they don't have much in the way of mainstream coverage, although a GHit check returned >400K hits. None of them were notable, and like DA, the band's article had already been deleted more than once. The deletion was effectively endorsed at the deletion review earlier this month was "no consensus to overturn". Again, like Deadstar Assembly, there was little in the way of reliable sources in the article (it at least had some citations, albeit not to appropriate sources), and the deleting admin was willing to userfy the article. I will extend to you the same offer. Horologium (talk) 22:31, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
The magazine posted above has the band on the cover, and thus indicates that there is more than just a mention of them. The specific article is archived (partially due to them being a print magazine and thus wont post the entire article online) on their page at the following URL (in german however)
http://www.zillo.de/magazin/mags/052006/magazin_leseproben_052006_deadstar_assembly.html Issue # 05/2006 Pages 12-18. Article title: Deadstar Assembly - Bizarr und intemsiv"
In the meantime I will provide you with a link to another Euro based print magazine of which the band was featured http://devolutionmagazine.co.uk/issues.htm (issue #10). Pages 40-41..a 2 page interview with the band.
And another euro based print magazine called "rimfrost" of which the band was featured: http://www.gothic.no/rimfrost.htm Issue 12. pages 7-12. Another interview with the band titled - Deadstar Assembly En Giftig blanding av death-pop og goth-rock"
http://www.metalhammer.co.uk/ featured the band in their June 2006 issue (waiting on exact page #) http://www.caustictruths.com/ an american print magazine which featured the band on page 54 of issue # 107.
http://www.sonic-seducer.de/index.php another german magazine that had a 2 page feature on the group. Waiting on exact issue #.
Orkus magazine featured the band on pages 48-49 in the following issue:
http://www.orkus.de/index_d.php?siteId=backissues&vonEg=15&wievielEintraege=15#
Issue - 2006-05 Article title - Deadstar Assembly (Newcomer des Monats) http://www.orkus.de/ (original site for reference)
—Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 21:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Since the deleting admin mentioned Project Gotham Racing. I believe this meets WP:MUSIC#10: "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a compilation album, etc. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that article.)" We could redirect, but deletion is not suitable. - Mgm|(talk) 05:58, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- That needs to be verified, though. Stifle (talk) 09:21, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- That has been verified, by the link that was provided above, from the game's official website; it wasn't cited in the article at the time I deleted it, although there was a passing mention. The website doesn't discuss the band, but includes a 30 second sample of one of their songs and a link to the band's website. I'm not sure that the inclusion in a video game alone is enough to confer notability; it's not a theme or a performance in a notable movie/TV show, and it's not from a compilation album; it's one of 90 tracks from a video game, albeit a notable one. I'm not opposed to restoring the article, but the sources that are available are of extremely low quality. Horologium (talk) 11:56, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
added a few magazine references above —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 21:05, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- After looking at the new crop of references added today, I believe that this group *is* notable enough for inclusion; it seems to have a lot of coverage in European music magazines, especially that feature article in Zillo. There is an article on the band on de.wiki at w:de:Deadstar Assembly, but it's as crappy as the one here (it claims the band is from South Beach, not Fort Lauderdale); w:pt:Deadstar Assembly (Portuguese) is a sub-stub. It's frustrating that the article had to be nuked before any semblance of sourcing could be produced, and that it had to come from someone with a financial interest in the band. This article,if retained, needs to be totally rewritten and referenced (preferably by someone with an understanding of German and no CoI issues.) WikiProject:Industrial (Music) might be able to help, since this is their genre. Horologium (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Also proof of the bands inclusion in the ABC Movie "Picture This" -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTB39MwFTe4
at 5:32 in the above video.
The song referenced is "Just Like You" which can be confrimed via streaming on our last fm page:
http://www.last.fm/music/Deadstar+Assembly —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 23:47, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
More references:
X Tra X Guitar Deadstar Assembly Guitar Giveaway in Germany
Zillo Magazine Info: (newer article from very recently) Dezember/Januar 2009 - 12/08-01/09, 20. Jahrgang
Page 8 News Page 10 Die Szene kocht: DeadStar Assembly Page 48 DVDs: DeadStar Assembly "Dark Hole Sessions Vol. 2" DVD Review —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 00:11, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
- Undelete and relist at AFD, the references here give some plausible suggestion of possible notability. Stifle (talk) 09:08, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
So what is the next course of action? If reinstated I will re-write the article to make it properly referenced as to meet the requirements of Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Elblots (talk • contribs) 18:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
List of algal culture collections (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD))
As noted by me and two others who commented, the article violates WP:NOT#LINK. Some argued that the links could just be made into references, but it would then become a directory of these farms, and so would violate WP:NOT#DIRECTORY. Since these reasons are policy, those supporting keep did not refute this, and consensus is based on policy, the consensus here was that the article should have been deleted. seresin ( ¡? ) 23:43, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
- sustain no-consensus If not improved, just wait a month or two and renominate, hoping for a clearer consensus. The basic feeling at the AfD was that this mainly needed major reformatting. give the interested people a chance to do it. I continue to not see the point of appealing a no-consensus close, unless it is really bizarre. DGG (talk) 00:33, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Maintain no-consensus. I can find me in DGG's opinion. If someone thinks an article can be improved, they should get the chance to do so. Concerns about the links can be met by adding {{NOINDEX}} while work is ongoing. -Mgm|(talk) 09:00, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Overturn and delete. The arguments in support of maintaining this linkfarm were in the WP:USEFUL family and should have been given less weight. Stifle (talk) 09:22, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- Weak overturn to delete Statistically the AfD is even, but none of the keep arguments even bothered citing any sort of policy. As Stifle said, they were just of the WP:USEFUL variety. The only arguments citing policy (correctly, in my opinion) were the arguments to delete. Themfromspace (talk) 11:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- endorse close Per DGG. Give them time to fix it up. there is no deadline. JoshuaZ (talk) 15:12, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
- endorse close per DGG. A good and well written article could exist here. Hobit (talk) 15:26, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Regrettable endorse close here's one that I think strongly ought to be deleted, but the community was mixed, hence "no consensus". Much of the keep spirit was animated by the much heralded and promised expansion. Give it a month or two, as DGG says, and if it's not improved it should go and those promising improvement slapped with a WP:TROUT. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 19:29, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
- Endorse "no conensus" as reading the discussion indicates that the will of the community is neither to keep nor delete and as default we keep in such instances. Best, --A NobodyMy talk 21:31, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Eric Violette (closed)
|
---|
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. |
Creation of this article has been permanently blocked since July 2008 because of repeated recreations without establishing notability. I have an article sitting in my User:Americasroof/Sandbox which I believes establishes notability including a IMDB profile and a New York Times story. A google search on the guy's name produces more than 500,000 hits. He has done a movie in addition to his commercials. I was not part of the previous articles. If people still have a problem with him it should go to afd rather than being permanently blocked by one administrator. Americasroof (talk) 18:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
|
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |
|
---|
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. |
Admin failed to recognize systemic bias Trachys (talk) 13:33, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
|
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |
Carolyn Joyce Carty (closed)
|
---|
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. |
Couldn't find the AFD; but, in any case, the article is salted; but, should probably redirect to Footprints (poem), as a likely search term. Neier (talk) 13:26, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
|
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |
Comsec Consulting Ltd. (closed)
|
---|
The following is an archived debate of the deletion review of the article above. Please do not modify it. |
Comsec Consulting Ltd. (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (restore | cache | AfD)) I think this page was unjustifiably deleted a number of times. It was written from a neutral POV, citing a number of third party substantiated references. There are MANY companies on here of the same size, and the same caliber that have pages that are much more advertising-oriented. I made a point of using phrases such as "commonly known for" and "active in", not provides services or our product line - as many other companies have done. I have proven our certification, and linked to our publicly traded page. As this is a public company, there are people with vested interests in the company who will find it important to be able to readily gather background information about our company. Wikipedia does not have a legal leg to stand on when deleting our page, when other company pages are present. This is clear bias. Furthermore, there has been a blatant disregard to Wikipedia policy. My tags for Deletion Review, and Speedy Deletion Review were just deleted and ignored. If I am to respect the Wikipedia guidelines, then certainly Wikipedia admins are expected to hold to them as well. I would be more than happy to respect any proposition for edits or changes to the piece to make it seem less like "blatant advertising" according to certain admins. No attempt to edit or modify the piece was made it was simply deleted, even after having been edited for the purpose of neutrality - which I believe was not even noticed or appreciated by the admins, it was simply redeleted without having even been read. Shar1R
|
The above is an archive of the deletion review of the page listed in the heading. Please do not modify it. |