Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Protomen (second nomination): Difference between revisions

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
TomTheHand (talk | contribs)
19,190 edits
No edit summary
Rohsiph (talk | contribs)
3 edits
Line 93: Line 93:
****Please review my above comments. You have still given NO indication of either why the Mix Magazine article is trivial in your opinion (given five paragraphs about the band, they seem pretty featured in an article to me) nor any inclusion of the other sources we have confirmed and presented here in this debate. [[User:Draxis|Draxis]] 20:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
****Please review my above comments. You have still given NO indication of either why the Mix Magazine article is trivial in your opinion (given five paragraphs about the band, they seem pretty featured in an article to me) nor any inclusion of the other sources we have confirmed and presented here in this debate. [[User:Draxis|Draxis]] 20:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
*****I don't have to defend myself to you. I feel that a five-paragraph blurb is trivial, and non-trivial coverage would consist of two or three pages. [[WP:MUSIC]] does not say "Has had more than 250 words written about it in reliable and reputable media," so I have the right to my own interpretation of non-trivial coverage. Similarly, the Nintendo Power coverage seems bordering on trivial, as well as bordering on non-reliable/reputable media. It's not a reputable music publication, it's the mouthpiece of a video game company giving one-page coverage to a band that writes songs about one of their games. Don't get me started on how you guys feel being played on a 100 watt college radio station is an assertion of notability. [[User:TomTheHand|TomTheHand]] 20:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
*****I don't have to defend myself to you. I feel that a five-paragraph blurb is trivial, and non-trivial coverage would consist of two or three pages. [[WP:MUSIC]] does not say "Has had more than 250 words written about it in reliable and reputable media," so I have the right to my own interpretation of non-trivial coverage. Similarly, the Nintendo Power coverage seems bordering on trivial, as well as bordering on non-reliable/reputable media. It's not a reputable music publication, it's the mouthpiece of a video game company giving one-page coverage to a band that writes songs about one of their games. Don't get me started on how you guys feel being played on a 100 watt college radio station is an assertion of notability. [[User:TomTheHand|TomTheHand]] 20:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
******Though I can respect your arguments on the physical articles to an extent (noting I wonder how any highly meaningful and unique, yet unpopular example of anything could every meet the guidelines based on what I understand of your interpretations, which I state because of what I understand as the purpose of Wikipedia as collecting meaningful information in a free, easy-to-access source), you are still ignoring a plethora of evidence for notability from Internet sources, both notable (to the point of having pages on Wikipedia), and trivial. If it really is part of the [[WP:MUSIC]] guidelines to ignore all such articles, which there is a clearly-stated exlusion for the trivial examples but none (that I see) for the notable sites, I have to ponder the irony of Wikipedia itself as a database proliferated via the Internet.

Revision as of 21:50, 21 June 2006

The Protomen

Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Protomen for the last time this was deleted. This has been deleted many times before and nothing has changed since then. Delete again. Wickethewok 04:53, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Keep. To say that the Protomen have gone unnoticed by a large portion of society is an extremely ignorant statement, one which I believe would be awful for a longtime user of Wikipedia to say. As this place has been created to provide the masses with information about everything that can be documented, would it not be proper to include even the most unknown bands that exist? The Protomen, however, are by far well-known, especially when compared to the three-piece group down the street that broke up after a gig. The aforementioned publication, Nintendo Power, has been in print since 1988, and has millions of subscribers. Many start-up bands who happen to receive some attention in professional music-oriented magazines usually do not receive as much press. Furthermore, the website GameSpot.com has linked to the Protomen's website, a small piece of advertising provided by a community which receives hundreds of thousands of hits on a daily basis. As if that weren't enough, nuklearpower.com has a similarly high number of unique hits every day, and they, too, have mentioned the Protomen. On one occasion, the sheer amount of traffic that the site endured put it under, yet it was not run on a home-based server with very little bandwith; it is, in fact, hosted by a professional hosting company. Also, the band has sold out of several pressings of their albums already, which is more than some artists manage even if they are licensed by a significant label. On top of that, they have sold their albums to people all around the world, ranging from places like Japan to Sweden. Though they have not toured internationally, they have in fact toured in several different states. Therefore, I conclude that they are not in fact a simple "garage band" and do not deserve to be labeled as such, nor should their Wikipedia article be deleted. --RazMasters 11:56, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nom... please see WP:MUSIC regarding notability... no one is saying they are not notable, period... they just aren't notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia... no offense, but we can't let just any garage band have an article, not that they are "just a garage band"... maybe a little later once that fan base has grown some more, and they have a couple more albums, tours, and magazine articles under their belt(s)... - Adolphus79 04:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I would agree against the requirement of needing more magazine articles under their belt. Wiki states that multiple features are needed, but does not specify a number. Two should by all rights count as multiple. Additionally, in regards to tours: the band has traveled to other states for shows, most recently to Clarksville, Indiana. As for a wider fan base, fans have traveled from literally all over the country (I happen to be from Arizona myself) to be present at their performances. The band has shipped many copies of its album overseas. Even if one might consider them to be a 'garage band', then one would have to conclude that they even more notable for being a garage band that fits these criteria. User:soyenhighmount Soyenhighmount 22:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I am strongly against the deletion of this article. Two different charges have been leveled against it: That the band is not noteable enough, and that the article is a repost of a previously deleted article. First off, The Protomen are notable. As stated in the article, the band has had articles published about them in Nintendo Power, Mix Magazine, and other various publications. The concept behind the band is unique, and their popularity is growing rapidly, especially for such an independent, underground production. The main avenue for gaining new fans is the internet, and as such, they have been linked to from popular internet sites. Most importantly, they have many devoted fans and are gaining more every day. Secondly, this article is certainly not merely a repost of a previously deleted article. It is newly written. Even if it were a repost, it has been modified enough since its creation so as to disqualify this charge. This article should not be deleted; please reconsider. --Timzor 06:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note: user Timzor's 8th edit, of which 7 are related to this band somehow (page edits, redirs, etc). ~Marblespire 05:47, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • As it happens, I have used Wikipedia for a while. However, I mostly confined myself to reading and making anonymous edits. It was only recently that I decided to create an account for myself, and since then have mostly been concentrating on making this article suitable for wikipedia. I'm not entirely sure what the point of your note is, seeing as how we're worried about an article, not me. --Timzor 06:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment: The number of edits you have is relavent to a certain point. A user that votes in Afd but has less than about 20 edits is often a sockpuppet of another user that is being used to fake consensus. While this is not always the case, it should always be noted during discussion.--SomeStranger(t|c) 11:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. Nintendo power is pretty big as far as magazines go. They have a large reader base and just the fact that they covered the Protomen says something about the attention they are getting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.171.97.239 (talk • contribs)
  • Delete per adolphus. I just don't see much of anything on Google showing more than a local fame. AdamBiswanger1 05:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per CODENAME:Adolphus79 and CODENAME:AdamBiswanger1. ~ trialsanderrors
  • Delete, per Adolphus79 and AdamBiswanger1. --Coredesat 08:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete as non-notable. Deli nk 12:54, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, doesn't quite fit for a speedy, sadly, as it's not the same unencyclopaedic garbage as it was last time. Although I really like the name ... Proto||type 13:06, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, the subject does not meet the inclusion guidelines laid out at WP:MUSIC.--Isotope23 13:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per all the deletes above. Nice concept for a band, hope it works out for them. Tychocat 14:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Wikipedia is not paper. Snugspout 14:26, 16 June 2006 (OTC)
  • 'Response - We all understand that, but you've left this as your response to many AFDs. "Wikipedia is not paper" is not a justification to keep anything/everything. I for one would appreciate it if you left more detailed responses in the future. Simply "because Wikipedia has more space" isn't good enough for me. Wickethewok 17:08, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Not notable, fails in a fairly profound manner in attempting to meet WP:MUSIC guidelines.--Auger Martel 16:45, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. As if my former entry on this page were not enough, as people are stating that the band does not meet the criteria mentioned in the linked-to article, here's what they do meet: 1. "Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...)." 2. "Has been the subject of a half hour or hour broadcast on a national radio network." (They have been played on true radio stations, not simply internet stations, although they were independents.) 3. "Has credit for writing or co-writing either lyrics or music for a musician or ensemble that qualifies above." (The Protomen have written all of their own works.) 4. "Has been the subject of a biography published as a book, or has several articles by at least 2 different authors in the peer reviewed publications." (They have been reviewed in published newspapers; even if said newspapers were independent, they were printed papers nonetheless, which were distributed to potentially hundreds of people.) 5. "Is cited in notable and verifiable sources as being influential in style, technique, repertory or teaching in a particular music genre." (As mentioned in my previous post, they include: Nintendo Power magazine, GameSpot.com, NuklearPower.com, and several unmentioned independent sites.) There are five reasons alone, but the Protomen could roughly qualify under some of the others, if one were to be loose with the rules. This would not be a bad thing to do, as: "Please note that the failure to meet any of these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted; likewise, the meeting of any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept. These are merely rules of thumb which some editors choose to keep in mind when deciding whether or not to keep an article that is on articles for deletion." And that is per the Wikipedia article on deletion itself. Therefore, I reiterate that their page does not deserve to be deleted. --RazMasters 10:04AM, 16 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment I've struck out your Keep above as that could be construed as trying to render 2 opinions, which is not allowed. Assuming Good faith that it was just an oversight on your part. You would also help your case if you could provide evidence to back up your claims... for instance, some sort of proof that they have "...been the subject of a half hour or hour broadcast on a national radio network." Personally, I think your strongest argument is #2 if it can be verified... or #4 (cites for #1 appear to be trivial & #3 is self-referential for a band) --Isotope23 18:18, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Thank you for striking out the Keep, as I did indeed not know that it could be counted as a second vote. As for #1, I do not understand how one could view a publication such as Nintendo Power as being trivial when few magazines published in the United States have as large of a reader base. It's in the millions, and the magazine has been in publication for nearly ten years now. People of all ages and from all over the world read it. They were not just mentioned in passing, either; the Protomen had an entire article dedicated to them in issue #201. As for the radio station information, I will get that and post it by the end of today if possible. The same goes for the reviews. RazMasters 19:35, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I wasn't refering to the magazine as trivial, I was referring to the article... Though a full article would not be "trivial" if it were at least a couple of pages and not just a blurb. I will look into it. Also, were there several full page articles about them in NP or other magazines? The criteria is "multiple non-trivial..." I'm willing to look at any evidence you can provide that proves they meet WP:MUSIC and I will change my opinion if verifiable evidence establishing them as meeting WP:MUSIC is provided.--Isotope23 19:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep This band has been featured in magazines, and will be featured in more. If you want something to be written better, to your liking, deleting it won't help. Edit, help the cause. The Protomen are notable, though new and have been linked off of websites that have their own Wiki here, like 8-bit Theatre. Quick googling doesn't prove much. They deserve more of a chance.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.71.64.230 (talk • contribs)
  • Keep This band will be much mroe well known with the release of their second album. And they are already making huge waves in internet communities. The fact that they have been linked by sites like 8 Bit Theater (which is huge) bespeaks their reach. --Lazarus Plus 18:22, 16 June 2006 (UTC) User's 14th edit in 7 months[reply]
  • Keep Being from Newfoundland, Canada, and knowing of The Protomen, I assure you is a notable band. Many of my friends and co-workers enjoy The Protoman. Keep them on here. Dwyn 18:25, 16 June 2006 (UTC)User's first edits.[reply]
  • Delete The proliferation of band pages for bands of zero importance must be cut into with an axe. If some decent evidence of importance can be found from anything other than their own propoganda, reconsider. I have the good sense not to make a page for my own terrible band - an stellar example for others.WilyD 18:31, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Evidence has already been provided and all of it can be easily verified. RazMasters 19:38, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment Considering that the assertion above is false, please rest assured that I continue to be of the opinion that the correct action is to delete the vaniety band page. There's zero evidence of encyclopaedic worthiness, and this discussion is making me feel like I'm in the state of Denmark WilyD 20:26, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment The information I have provided is not false. It is all authentic. The websites can be visited for verification, and Nintendo Power is indeed a very real magazine. Additional information will be provided in the near future (ideally, by the end of the day), as well. RazMasters 22:19, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment Try reading what I wrote. The statement Evidence has already been provided and all of it can be easily verified. was false, and I thus identified it as such. WilyD 03:51, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • Comment I must apologize, as I did not know that opening a widely published magazine (available everywhere from supermarkets to specialty stores) to turn to page 91, or visiting websites and conducting a search, were extremely difficult things. May I rephrase, then, and say that the evidence has already been provided, but simply must be checked, and is unfortunately extremely difficult to get due to its accessible nature? RazMasters 04:09, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • Comment I think you'll find that assumptions about the physical availability of a magazine are going to be fraught with difficulty - not everyone lives in your hamlet. Additionally It's on the interweb, somewhere isn't something most people will spend their day tracking down, some of us have jobs. WilyD 12:35, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I learned of Protomen through no direct advertisement or promotion of the band itself. They were featured in issue #201 of Nintendo Power. I am located in Florida, have never met nor spoken to directly anyone affiliated with this band yet their influence has reached me this far. This article should remain.Draxis 19:07, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Update - The Protomen were also featured in the April 2006 issue of Mix, a magazine in publish since at least 1999. If you Google "Protomen" you will find about 13,800 returns almost all of which upon random inspections appear to be in direct relation to this band. Google of the bands technical name, "The Protomen", still returns 10,900 unique webpages. Draxis 21:36, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No, it doesn't. "The Protomen" gives 12,200 total pages, but only 264 are unique. I don't know if anything (aside from a word like "sex" or "cheese" or "Smith") would get 10,900 unique hits. -- Kicking222 21:49, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Thank you! I've been a Wiki reader for a while but my feelings on this topic have somewhat inspired me to begin edited and posting my thoughts and make an effort to learn all the code. Thank you for the welcome.Draxis 21:24, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Disagree, and have provided an argument as to why. I have yet to see a sufficient counter-argument; most are choosing to simply quote a link without explaining themselves. RazMasters 22:27, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Perhaps The Protomen were non-notable six months ago, and perhaps even three months ago. However, after three unique waves (that I have been aware of) of rising popularity since last October, The Protomen are no longer non-notable. As mentioned, popular sites such as nuklearpowered/8_Bit_Theatre have linked to the band, and mention has also appeared on other notable sites, including the Machinae_supremacy boards, at the bottom of a Gamespot article, and on the now-defunct cult boards at Penny_Arcade. In late October/early November, a number of popular videogame blogs, including Kotaku, picked up an article written for the Radio Free Internet blog about The Protomen (article available here: http://radiofreeinternet.imjasonh.com/index.php/archives/2005/11/08/89/ ). In addition, dozens of independent blogs across the country have made posts proclaiming the strength of the message that The Protomen present through their music. Some fans were so-compelled to see the band live this past April that they traveled more than five hundred miles to Nashville for their first live show post-Internet-celebrity. I am one such person, having driven just over one thousand miles round-trip from Chicago. Of course, such factors are personal; apparently, via the wiki music guidelines, even the strongest up-and-coming bands are doomed for deletion until some arbitrary numeric popularity is achieved (via some common form media representation, regardless of community support). At the very least, as a Chicago native, I wonder how Chicago-local band Russian Circles, acknowledging they play excellent music, can obtain secure wiki status where The Protomen must fight (indeed, in accord with the quick-sniping tone of most delete votes) even though, as I have personally seen, The Protomen have a wider worldwide following (though more scattered), and a more important message--though, again, personal feelings seem to sway little here. As far as traditional evidence: I have sent a scan of the Nintendo Power article to RazMasters (who mentioned intention of acquiring the article to subsequently post) as proof of this article's existence. I also submit a link to a recording of the local-channel broadcast that was previously mentioned, which can be found here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R4B8te4gu4Q which is still a recording of a local program, but I have trouble seeing how the continuous viral-media-style spread of The Protomen's popularity, at this point, fails to constitute notability. The Protomen have defined a new genre, achieved a following that has been producing a wide variety of fan-art since January, and have sold out of copies of their album at least twice since October. In the sad event this community does, in fact, decide The Protomen have yet to achieve their popularity at this point, all who are posting for deletion should be aware that they will attain notability eventually--and probably sooner than later, with a wave of shows being planned for this coming October.Rohsiph 00:14, 17 June 2006 (UTC) User's first edit[reply]
  • Keep As quoted from WP:MUSIC which everyone says they do not meet: "Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...)." and as has been previously stated several times, they were featured in both Nintendo Power, and Mix Magazine. Minirogue 00:41, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Number of Protomen fans on last.fm: 550. Number of fans for AIDS Wolf, another band up for deletion: 1175. ~ trialsanderrors 05:11, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment As even the highest ranking bands on the last.fm charts have had 200,000 downloads or less, I would not consider last.fm a worthwhile source to reference (whether for positive or negative reasons). Also, judging by their Wikipedia article, AIDS Wolf fails to meet many of the criteria which the Protomen have met or surpassed. RazMasters 08:18, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I've not seen any more postings here to indicate additional opinions swaying in one direction or the other; therefore, I'm going to assume (for now) that the article will not be deleted. In the very near future, I will add more information to the Protomen article itself, including those bits I've linked to elsewhere in this discussion. RazMasters 17:30, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Doesn't really meet WP:MUSIC, and the proffered evidence is mighty weak. The MIX article, for example, seems mostly about the department of Middle Tennessee State University that the group springs from. And playing for a 100-watt student station? Could anyone outside the dorms pick up the signal? --Calton | Talk 04:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment I think the full page article in Nintendo Power was enough alone to justify notability. Everyone needs to realize that those of us whom know of this band live in separate states and even countries because of the media and press this band has received recently. You can shoot down two of our sources if you'd like, but theres still all the other sources that are featured right here in Wikipedia and we only need one of them to prove notability. I also have to disagree with you on the Mix Magazine article, there was quite a bit of information available about The Protomen, enough to get another bunch of fans anyway. Draxis 12:37, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment If you've simply stated that the article seems to be entirely about the university, does that mean you haven't read it in its entirety? The article opens (as many do) by leading the reader to their destination, which is a meeting with the Protomen. Also, you've cited the Mix Magazine as an example, but have neglected to mention the worldwide press that it proffers; additionally, by not commenting on the Nintendo Power article, you seem to be ignoring that as well. As aforementioned, Nintendo Power has millions of readers all over the world. Mix Magazine is published in dozens of countries. How much "stronger" must their evidence be? It does meet the requirements of WP:MUSIC, and we have explained why. Outside of people voicing their personal opinion, I have seen no one manage to effectively counter what's been said in the Protomen's favor. (And as for the radio station mentioned, it is also broadcast live over the internet, meaning that its potential listener base is limited only by what their servers can allow.) RazMasters 18:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Comment, WP:MUSIC requires multiple sources, so you need more than one to prove they meet the WP:MUSIC criteria on that particular point.--Isotope23 16:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment Please keep in mind the last five paragraphs on Mix Magazine are in direct reference of The Protomen and it's band members. There is even a picture of their frontman, Panther, featured in the article. Ironically, it even calls The Protomen a "notable band" in the article itself. Keep in mind all the information about McDonald is in fact about The Protomen, as he is a member. This and Nintendo Power is two non-minor articles that were physically published and distributed in multiple countries. I do not believe you can dismiss the five paragraph read on the band as being trivial, given it is giving the band high praise and includes a picture as well as a fairly lengthy read in and of itself. Combined that with very large and notable online sources (including, but not limited to gamespot, penny-arcade, and others) spreading the word of the band and what you have is alot of publicity that the band itself did not attempt to generate. It is through these sources that almost all of us have found The Protomen (from all around the world) and many more will no doubt continue to do so. I could see how all this could be dismissed if it were mere advertisements created by the band itself, but that is most certainly not the case. I believe this bands popularlity and non-self generated coverage is being sorely underestimated. Draxis 16:54, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Comment As Draxis has stated, more than one source has been cited. RazMasters 18:22, 19 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Having been watching this discussion for some time, i decided to look over the WP:Music criteria and I feel that they have met the following: Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media ((as was verified by the Nintendo Power and Mix Mag articles)), Is cited in notable and verifiable sources as being influential in style, technique, repertory or teaching in a particular music genre. ((While im not sure if this can be verified, they have become quite reputable for their style in the articles that mention them, so i apologize if this does not fit for them)) Scathien

  • (To the tune of Hot Pockets jingle) Watcha gonna pick? Sockpuppet! Users first edit. Anyways, according to official Wikipedia policy regarding the subject at hand, "Neither a sock puppet nor a brand-new, single-purpose account holder is considered a member of the Wikipedia...". Just letting you guys know whats up. Wickethewok 12:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I suppose I'm still a "sock puppet" too, eh? Me and this guy should start a club. If you're going to accuse someone of being a puppet, mayhaps you could at least spare us your jokes. -Timzor 14:55, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • I could really care less if someone accuses me of sockpuppetry, ive already read the whole deal about it and why my comments and/or votes may be ignored *shrugs* its just a part of the game i suppose, even if my arguements are supposedly useable, its up to the moderator to decide if what i have to say is valid anyway, not some guy who gets his kicks out of pointing out that someone has their hand up a sock's backside Scathien
  • Comment He's pretty much just repeated what the rest of us have been saying. I still strongly feel both of those criteria have been met. While you can argue the later, I don't believe it can be argued at this point that they have been featured in multiple non-trivial publications. This next statement is not directed at Wicke, it's in general: I have seen no valid argument beyond linking to WP:Music or claims of sockpuppetry. This is not a vote, anyone whom is a sockpuppet is irrelevant. Our defense supported by facts has been presented. I have not seen a single person provide any compelling argument as to why these two criteria (among other things that would prove notability) are not legitimate and honestly I don't think that's going to happen given the strength of the "multiple non-trivial publications" argument. People can continue to point fingers at sockpuppets, they can continue to link to the WP:Music but the fact remains we have provided factual resources and proof; these are the things that must be defeated, not each individual user in this debate. Just a reminder. :) Draxis 13:15, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. Doesn't meet notability requirements, and it bothers me how thin and almost deceptive RazMaster's evidence is. The Mix Magazine article isn't even about The Protomen; they're just mentioned in passing. Sorry, RazMasters, I understand that you're a fan and you're trying to slip this one by in any way you possibly can, but I've looked at the evidence and this is not notable. TomTheHand 13:25, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment The entire last five paragraphs are about The Protomen. Panther & McDonald are members of the band. Please review the article and reconsider your statement. There is also a full page spread article above on the band from Nintendo Power and links to other notable internet-based media and press sites. Draxis 13:48, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
      • Reviewed, reconsidered, and still saying delete. TomTheHand 15:36, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
        • Please review my above comments. You have still given NO indication of either why the Mix Magazine article is trivial in your opinion (given five paragraphs about the band, they seem pretty featured in an article to me) nor any inclusion of the other sources we have confirmed and presented here in this debate. Draxis 20:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
          • I don't have to defend myself to you. I feel that a five-paragraph blurb is trivial, and non-trivial coverage would consist of two or three pages. WP:MUSIC does not say "Has had more than 250 words written about it in reliable and reputable media," so I have the right to my own interpretation of non-trivial coverage. Similarly, the Nintendo Power coverage seems bordering on trivial, as well as bordering on non-reliable/reputable media. It's not a reputable music publication, it's the mouthpiece of a video game company giving one-page coverage to a band that writes songs about one of their games. Don't get me started on how you guys feel being played on a 100 watt college radio station is an assertion of notability. TomTheHand 20:16, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
            • Though I can respect your arguments on the physical articles to an extent (noting I wonder how any highly meaningful and unique, yet unpopular example of anything could every meet the guidelines based on what I understand of your interpretations, which I state because of what I understand as the purpose of Wikipedia as collecting meaningful information in a free, easy-to-access source), you are still ignoring a plethora of evidence for notability from Internet sources, both notable (to the point of having pages on Wikipedia), and trivial. If it really is part of the WP:MUSIC guidelines to ignore all such articles, which there is a clearly-stated exlusion for the trivial examples but none (that I see) for the notable sites, I have to ponder the irony of Wikipedia itself as a database proliferated via the Internet.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Protomen_(second_nomination)&oldid=59887996"