Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Friday Nite Improvs: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→[[Friday Nite Improvs]]: comment |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
**'''Comment''' Note: I wanted some advice on how to approach this appropriately. I don't also want to get too personal. I am open to criticism of the article, however; I need to do a LexisNexus search soon to get some more information on the topic.--[[User:ChrisGriswold|Chris Griswold]] 01:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
**'''Comment''' Note: I wanted some advice on how to approach this appropriately. I don't also want to get too personal. I am open to criticism of the article, however; I need to do a LexisNexus search soon to get some more information on the topic.--[[User:ChrisGriswold|Chris Griswold]] 01:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep''', dubious AfD nom. [[User:Combination|Combination]] 00:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''', dubious AfD nom. [[User:Combination|Combination]] 00:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
||
**'''Comment'''- This was in no way retaliatory AFD, I just found similar issues with this article (as mentioned above). I still have doubts it is notable, but seems like a consensus says otherwise. Some citations still are needed here, however.[[User:24.3.59.222|24.3.59.222]] 04:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 04:40, 5 August 2006
- Delete- Not notable. Local in scope, no verifiable evidence of attendence figures. No links verfing several of the notable alumni. Much of its information is from its own internal sources (its own website), not verifiable through outside sources and therefore not encyclopaedic. Completely lacks A significant amount of media coverage that is not trivial in nature and that deals specifically with the organization as the primary subject (from Wikipedia's notability page). Promotional in nature and without sources, its hard to tell what is factual. Cs1085 13:47, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Do not delete. - AfD created in retaliation for an AfD on the Telefact article, which, unfortunately, the creators of that article have |taken very personally. Friday Nite Improvs brought up for deletion less than a month ago but passed using notability standards for music. See: Talk:Friday Nite Improvs#Why this article is notable.--Chris Griswold 18:38, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Passes WP:MUSIC (which is the closest notability standard), and this seems to be a retaliatory AFD. (Disclosure: ChrisG asked me to come and take a administrative look at this AFD, but I decided to just participate instead.) - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:30, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment Note: I wanted some advice on how to approach this appropriately. I don't also want to get too personal. I am open to criticism of the article, however; I need to do a LexisNexus search soon to get some more information on the topic.--Chris Griswold 01:23, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Keep, dubious AfD nom. Combination 00:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)
- Comment- This was in no way retaliatory AFD, I just found similar issues with this article (as mentioned above). I still have doubts it is notable, but seems like a consensus says otherwise. Some citations still are needed here, however.24.3.59.222 04:40, 5 August 2006 (UTC)