Talk:Nic Armstrong & The Thieves

Untitled
This band is mentioned in several articles on Wikipedia and as such this article should not be deleted. Please note that the article "2005 Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival" mentions many bands, all of which have pages. Only two bands listed in that article did not have a page, and this was one of them. This band is also mentioned in the article "Noise and Confusion" and an article about a TV series in which one of their songs was used. If mention within Wikipedia itself is not notable, then the entire project of Wikipedia is itself not notable. I sort of feel like you're just picking a fight with me and my article. At worst, this article is a stub and an orphan, not an article that needs to be deleted. The band has been reviewed by National Public Radio, their album was engineered by a major recording engineer who himself has a Wikipedia page. Further, you you misread me. Not "first rule of Wikipedia, don't talk about Wikipedia" but rather: "If an article already on Wikipedia lists 95 other bands and this is the only one among them without a page, why not give them a page?" Further "If this band is mentioned in 6 or 7 other Wikipedia articles, and we take those articles as noteworthy and not deletable, then surely the information they present is also noteworthy and not deletable, ergo, information about this band is noteworthy and not deletable." Is it possible to get another administrator to weigh in on this? I would like to hear a second opinion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cicero in utero (talk • contribs) 08:01, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think that within-Wikipedia mention falls under the purview of WP:N or WP:RS. Try to establish notability through reliable secondary sources elsewhere on the web, and start a Wikified article. Thurinym (talk) 07:38, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * First rule of Wikipedia, don't talk about Wikipedia? I think that's too... meta.  As an encyclopedia, it's sort of the point that Wikipedia categorises information found in other secondary sources, and Wikipedia doesn't count for inside notability.  More on topic, though, why don't you bring in that article as a source if you feel it's reliable?  It might help you build up the information that's already there. Thurinym (talk) 07:46, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Firstly: I was not the one who elected this article for CSD. Secondly: I'm just trying to help you make the article better (which you seem to be doing quite handily with the sources you've got on hand) and thirdly: I'm not an administrator.  I'm just another editor working on Wikipedia in my free time.  My point is this: For a newly created article, it was an unsourced, single-paragraph stub about one music group.  I raised the concern that it might not be notable under the criteria you offered (it's mentioned on Wikipedia) although you've definitely added enough links to the primary page to at least start out with sourcing concerns.  I'm no longer questioning your article's survivability, now it's just content, and that's your mission (what with creating the article in the first place.) Thurinym (talk) 08:12, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well then, who did elect it for CSD? Also, IT WAS NOT UNSOURCED! The very first draft included a source directly linking the article to the band's review by National Public Radio. Surely NPR is noteworthy? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cicero in utero (talk • contribs) 08:25, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * |This revision was the one where Avs5221 did; at this point, I think he's the only one to take this up with, though he's probably just a muckraker editor aiming to keep Wiki clean. Since you're serious about sourcing and improving your article, I doubt you'll have any issue with contesting the CSD.  Thurinym (talk) 08:30, 9 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello. This article is clearly not a speedy deletion candidate, even the initial version included reference, a link to NPR Music. A quick glance at the result of searching in the Google News Archives reveals substantial and independent coverage in the multiple third party sources, and that's what you need to create an article here. The band meets the notability requirements for bands, in my opinion. Take the article to AfD, if you disagree. Thank you. --Vejvančický (talk) 09:22, 9 April 2010 (UTC)