Misplaced Pages

:Articles for deletion/Suntribe: Difference between revisions - Misplaced Pages

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
< Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:29, 13 August 2012 editStatus (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, File movers, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers, Template editors69,287 editsm Suntribe: fix← Previous edit Revision as of 12:39, 13 August 2012 edit undoWesley Wolf (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers42,740 edits Suntribe: note to adminsNext edit →
Line 53: Line 53:
::* {{ec}} - If you feel articles could do with a lot of expansion and improvements Bleubeatle, then why don't you do what we are suppose to do on Misplaced Pages and help to improve them, rather than press the AfD button on them? In my opinion, for someone to just nominate an article for deletion rather than help to improve it is the lazy and cowardice way out of contributing collaboratively. <b style="background:black">] ]</b> 12:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC) ::* {{ec}} - If you feel articles could do with a lot of expansion and improvements Bleubeatle, then why don't you do what we are suppose to do on Misplaced Pages and help to improve them, rather than press the AfD button on them? In my opinion, for someone to just nominate an article for deletion rather than help to improve it is the lazy and cowardice way out of contributing collaboratively. <b style="background:black">] ]</b> 12:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
::Also Bleubeatle is now wanting to influence the closing of this and another article. While at the same time accusing me and Wesley of --] (]) 12:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC) ::Also Bleubeatle is now wanting to influence the closing of this and another article. While at the same time accusing me and Wesley of --] (]) 12:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

:::'''Notice to closing admin''' - This discussion has been contaminated severely seeing as there accusation of canvassing between myself and BabbaQ. And other users appear to be doing the same in order to gather support for mass-deletion of Eurovision articles. Diffs are as follows - , , and . People shouldn't cast accusations of canvassing, and then go about the same actions themselves. <b style="background:black">] ]</b> 12:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Revision as of 12:39, 13 August 2012

Suntribe

Suntribe (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)

Fails general notability. This girl group disbanded very quickly after they formed, and released no material during their small "career"; only being part of Eurovision 2005. Statυs (talk) 01:26, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000 02:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Estonia-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000 02:23, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Eurovision Song Contest 2005/Delete. I found one source but otherwise there's nothing to show notability for this group. It might be usable as a redirect, though. I would also recommend that you look into the articles Let's Get Loud (Suntribe song), Laura Põldvere, and Mari-Leen, as they seem to have had articles created about them and may not pass notability guidelines. The song most likely wouldn't.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 07:04, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep - The articles that the nominator has mentioned do fulfil notability for many reasons. They were participants in a contest that is watched by over 125 million viewers worldwide. The contest itself is highly notable as are the artist(s) who participated in the contest over the last 57 years, and their songs which they performed. Wesley Mouse 11:39, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep - Eurovision itself gives instant notability to a music group. End of story.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:14, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
  • note to closing admin this !vote was canvassed
Not so much canvassed as notified of an article with a subject concerning a Wiki group that I am a part of. And of a subject that I have much knowledge and interest in. --BabbaQ (talk) 14:31, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
But I agree with you that it is better to not "ask" a user per say to look at a AfD. But on the other hand asking someone with knowledge about a certain subject. And when both users are members of the Eurovision project it can hardly be considered bad faith. peace.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:33, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I find it highly offensive that a user has falsely accused me of canvassing without justification. As a member of WP:EURO I was acting in good faith to inform another member of the project of an article discussion - know that they didn't have the article alerts page on their watchlist. I felt it polite to allow a member of the same project the opportunity to participate in a discussion and make their own !vote choice. Wesley Mouse 14:36, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Justification = BabbaQ votes keep 99.9% of the time. Wesley mouse failed to notify those who are known to vote delete. It's offensive not to notify a wide range of editors. babbaQ does not need direction of where to vote. LibStar (talk) 14:40, 12 August 2012 (UTC)

Still assume good faith Libstar. I have no reason to !vote Keep if it is a Delete worthy article. Me and Wesley are members of the same Eurovision wikiproject and both have knowledge about the contest and its participants and that is the main reason to why Wesley notified me, not because he wanted a Keep !vote.--BabbaQ (talk) 14:43, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Redirect to Let's Get Loud (Suntribe song). The article does seem to meet notability because they performed at Eurovision Song Contest but there seems to be a lack of improvement/development as the group was short lived. Since the notable event is a song contest it is better to re-direct it the song entry article. Bleubeatle (talk) 08:13, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
    we have been trough this before Bleubeatle. Performing at a Music competition with more then 100 million peoplewatching is notable in itself. --BabbaQ (talk) 20:16, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

We havent merged any created Eurovision performer/performers article of the Eurovisions from the 21st century via the fact that it is notablility to have performed at Eurovision so far. So lets not set a strange one-off precedent here.--BabbaQ (talk) 20:20, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

  • I don't understand. I haven't mentioned any mergers in my sentence. Re-directs are very different from mergers. Perhaps editing the article would be the best thing so that it has its own page? Then hopefully the nominator would re-consider withdrawing this. Bleubeatle (talk) 22:21, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
  • I think what BabbaQ means is by redirecting the article some or all of its contents would most likely need to be merged into the other in order to keep a record of some of the facts. If we redirect, then the contents from Suntribe article would technically be erased. Wesley Mouse 22:33, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Hmm I'm not sure about that. All I know is that a deletion means a loss of information which I'm not supporting since I believe its content is still important. Looking at the article now, more content has been added since it was nominated so let's wait for the nominator's verdict then. Bleubeatle (talk) 23:11, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Keep - Being short lived doesn't make a band non-notable. Saying they "released no material" is also false, as they released another single, which means it doesn't violate WP:BIO1E. Even so, that policy also states that "if an event is of sufficient importance, even relatively minor participants may require their own articles". Better sources are indeed required, however. Sang'gre Habagat (talk) 11:37, 12 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Strongly Keep - Back in February, the page for Anri Jokhadze, the Georgian participant at the Eurovision Song Contest 2012, came under an AFD. Like Suntribe, he achieved nothing notable apart from performing at Eurovision. At the time, Wesley Mouse said the following (which applies here too):

    If such articles become deleted, then we'd might as well start deleting all articles relating to one-time participants in Eurovision, and create a black hole in a project. Many English-speaking users worldwide rely on such Eurovision-related articles for the purpose of research for whatever reasons, whether it be pub quizzes, or general enthusiasm for the Eurovision Song Contest, and everything - artist(s) and song(s). Don't start crashing down a European heritage and cause a huge research black hole.

    This means that if Suntribe gets deleted, then, by Status' logic, we'll have to get rid of Jemini, Josh Dubovie and Lindsay Dracass for a start. And this is just going backwards. This makes this whole nomination ridiculous, as is the nomination for The Mullans... Spa-Franks (talk) 09:29, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
  • What exactly is "by Status' logic" supposed to mean? Jemini, Josh Dubovie and Lindsay Dracass are completely different situations, all three of those have a song that has charted; proving there is something, at least, notable about them. I would really like for someone who isn't involved with the Eurovision project to comment here, as there are many articles created that are apart of the project that fail notability and should not exist. It seems as if all members of the project feel every single song ever done on Eurovision is notable, when that's not the case at all. Each song can easily be summarized in their respective years. Statυs (talk) 10:52, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Participating at Eurovision the worlds by far biggest music competition on TV with more then 100 million viewers givs instant notability. Even if the singer/s, groups never charts with a song again. Representing a whole country is notable.--BabbaQ (talk) 11:07, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
No, it isn't. Please take a look at WP:ONEEVENT. "When the role played by an individual in the event is less significant, an independent article may not be needed, and a redirect is appropriate". 20th place is not significant. I think articles for anything above ten are appropriate, but anything beyond that are ridiculous. Statυs (talk) 11:12, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I think Status already understands how notable the event is BabbaQ. I think his point was that not every contestant/participant/representative in this event requires their own article unless they have done other notable activities beyond the contest. Bleubeatle (talk) 11:11, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Exactly what I'm saying. Statυs (talk) 11:12, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Ever heard of a strawman before?--BabbaQ (talk) 11:15, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't see how that's relevant to this discussion. Bleubeatle (talk) 11:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
I bet you do.--BabbaQ (talk) 12:16, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
It appears that you don't. Statυs (talk) 11:31, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
No I understand, do you I ask?--BabbaQ (talk) 12:16, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
You clearly don't. Statυs (talk) 12:21, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
  • Reply to Spa-Franks - I've checked some of those articles that you've listed. Josh Dubovie seems to be the only good example since he has done some notable activities beyond his participation, based on the content of his article. As for the other articles, I think that they really need a lot of expansion and improvement. Bleubeatle (talk) 11:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
  • (edit conflict) - If you feel articles could do with a lot of expansion and improvements Bleubeatle, then why don't you do what we are suppose to do on Misplaced Pages and help to improve them, rather than press the AfD button on them? In my opinion, for someone to just nominate an article for deletion rather than help to improve it is the lazy and cowardice way out of contributing collaboratively. Wesley Mouse 12:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Also Bleubeatle is now wanting to influence the closing of this and another article. While at the same time accusing me and Wesley of doing so--BabbaQ (talk) 12:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Notice to closing admin - This discussion has been contaminated severely seeing as there accusation of canvassing between myself and BabbaQ. And other users appear to be doing the same in order to gather support for mass-deletion of Eurovision articles. Diffs are as follows - 1, 2, and 3. People shouldn't cast accusations of canvassing, and then go about the same actions themselves. Wesley Mouse 12:39, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Categories: