Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2011 March 27

RE: below is a help question from me that you replied to:

The Question: "I moved my page from my user space to Ayurveda (Band) in an attempt to the launch the page. In return, I now have this message at the top of the page: This page is a new unreviewed article. This template should be removed once the page has been reviewed by someone other than its creator; if necessary the page should be appropriately tagged for cleanup. If you are the article's creator, you can seek feedback on your new article. (July 2010)

Will the "review" happen automatically by WikiReviewers or do I have to take some other action. I am most anxious to get this page launched. Thank you. Whysosirius (talk) 19:53, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Your Answer: The article has been deleted as unambiguous advertising so it is a moot point, but in any event the best thing to do is ask at WP:Requests for feedback. – ukexpat (talk) 20:10, 25 March 2011 (UTC)"

I would like to dispute your decision to delete the Ayurveda (band) page as "unambiguous advertising". I dispute it for many reasons and in no particular order. 1. The information provides a different meaning to the pre-existing Wikipedia page on Ayurveda which has to do with Ayurvedic medicine. 2. I looked at similiar musician Wiki pages such as that for St. Vincent and I see a correlation between the two. Both bands play at common venues and therefore can be considered peers. Why one and not the other? 3. Ayurveda has a legion of followers for example, over 15,000 fans on Reverbnation. Clearly there is an interest in knowing more encyclopedic info about the band, its history, and its catalog of music/videos. 4. There is a multi-cultural aspect to info on Ayurveda as two of its members are Nepali and there are thousands of fans from there. Diwas Gurung, and Ayurveda, are included in the Wiki Nepalese rock page. Also, Ayurveda is included in another wiki page, Ithaca, NY/music and musicians. 5. Ayurveda's latest work "H. luminous" is of interest in that it is a concept piece that plays off an existing Wikipage, 2012. The piece, "H. lumionous" is a work of art that espouses beliefs contained in the 2012 page that this period is "spiritually transformative"...and centers "upon various interpretations of the Mesoamerican Long Count Calendar." 5. Ayurveda is also relevant in that they are a group of young men who are committed to the environment and global issues. From silkscreening their own merchandise and using recyclable materias to being active in social issues, this page sets them apart from many other bands that are featured in Wikipedia. They are committed locally and globally (to an orphanage in Nepal) and the telling of their story isn't about marketing but informing. Taken as a whole, I cannot accept that this page represents a marketing ploy and I am committed to getting your decision to delete the page overturned. Please let me know a point of contact within Wikipedia that I can make the case for making this page available to online users. Thank you in advance for your assistance. 12:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC) Whysosirius (talk) 12:12, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

I made an attempt to contact the user who deleted the page, ukexpat. I received no reply. Whysosirius (talk) 16:41, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article was deleted by Orangemike, not ukexpat. Did you contact Orangemike? Stifle (talk) 16:53, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I contacted Orangemike after posting this deletion review only because I was unaware that it was Orangemike that deleted the page, not ukexpat. Have not heard from orangemike as of this writingWhysosirius (talk) 22:26, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The tone of the above note is indicative. I will quote from the lede, "They are accomplished songwriters, musicians, and recording artists whose energetic and soulful live performances showcase the strength of their body of work." They also are noted as having made Vimeo videos! Big whoop. They failed WP:BAND, and the article as written contained no credible assertions of notability. --Orange Mike | Talk 13:15, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Overturn speedy and send to AFD. The article was horridly fannish, but could have been stubbed while including an assertion of significance. One of the links demonstrated that one of the band's CDs had been reviewed favorably by the Washington Post, which should be enough of an assertion of significance to survive A7 -- not that that was easy to spot among all the fanclutter. I expect they do fail WP:BAND, but there's a possibility that they don't, so a full AFD is called for. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:08, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

In following the trail of comments with regard to the Ayurveda page, I can see mistakes have been made. Only excuse is, first time outta the box with Wiki. I would like the opportunity to work on a rewrite with the guidance of some editors before trying to launch. Problem now, I can't even get to the page on a user space. Surely the page isn't gone, gone. Help please, anyone? Whysosirius (talk) 14:29, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]