Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Elsinore (band) (2nd nomination)
Appearance
AfDs for this article:
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Elsinore (band) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
This was inexplicably kept in 2010 but I see no evidence it actually meets inclusion criteria. The most significant source was from the AV club but aside from that everything appears to be hyper local and they don't appear to have charted. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 16:05, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete: Per WP:NBAND. The AV Club link comes up as a 404, and there is no real information in the article past the lede. Bkissin (talk) 16:20, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Neither of those arguments justifies deletion. --Michig (talk) 06:49, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Illinois-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:08, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 17:08, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Delete. Fails WP:NBAND and WP:GNG. Bradv 17:26, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. There is plenty of coverage to establish notability, e.g. [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14]. Two albums on Parasol Records should also be sufficient to satisfy criterion 5 of WP:NMUSIC. --Michig (talk) 06:46, 12 September 2018 (UTC) And the AV Club reference being a 404 is irrelevant to notability, and it can be retrieved from an archived version - [15]. --Michig (talk) 06:49, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- For the record, my reason for nominating had nothing to do with the 404 as it was easily available via archived versions. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:26, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- As for the rest, this is exactly why I nommed it - the huffpo piece is an interview in a blog, as are most of the rest or hyper local blogs. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- The majority of the sources listed above are clearly neither blogs nor 'hyper local'. --Michig (talk) 16:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- That's incorrect, Michig. This, aside from two sentences is an interview, this is a blog, blog, two sentences in a blog, announcement, hyper local show listing/interview, hyper local. And to be honest, as far as the Demig reviews go, I'm not convinced that the same person reviewing a band 5 times (Mark Demig) constitutes the multiple sources covering it required. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- There are only two of Mark Deming's reviews among the 14 sources listed, not five as you state. There are also two reviews from PopMatters and one from Exclaim!. As for the blogs, these are newspaper staff blogs, and are reliable sources. --Michig (talk) 18:06, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- Blogs by nature are not useful for establishing notability since they are not subject to the same editorial oversight. Also you're not addressing the fact that they are hyper local. Riverfront Times is local and not significant. As far as the reviews, All of the reviews and biogs on AllMusic are written by the same person and the two popmatters reviews are 3 sentences each. Pastemagazine is a blog. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 18:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- There are only two of Mark Deming's reviews among the 14 sources listed, not five as you state. There are also two reviews from PopMatters and one from Exclaim!. As for the blogs, these are newspaper staff blogs, and are reliable sources. --Michig (talk) 18:06, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- That's incorrect, Michig. This, aside from two sentences is an interview, this is a blog, blog, two sentences in a blog, announcement, hyper local show listing/interview, hyper local. And to be honest, as far as the Demig reviews go, I'm not convinced that the same person reviewing a band 5 times (Mark Demig) constitutes the multiple sources covering it required. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- The majority of the sources listed above are clearly neither blogs nor 'hyper local'. --Michig (talk) 16:47, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- As for the rest, this is exactly why I nommed it - the huffpo piece is an interview in a blog, as are most of the rest or hyper local blogs. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:27, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- For the record, my reason for nominating had nothing to do with the 404 as it was easily available via archived versions. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:26, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- Keep. Michig's refs evidence notability. Article needs to be built up, not deleted. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 08:14, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- Comment Given the amount of information about this band, it is unfortunate that this article has remained in the state that it's in since the first Deletion discussion 8 years ago. Michig, you seem to know a lot about this band, I invite you to incorporate the sources you found into the article so that this doesn't happen again. Bkissin (talk) 17:28, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- Bkissin half of those sources are problematic as they're blogs or typical local paper "this show is happening" announcements. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 17:48, 12 September 2018 (UTC)