User:Damian Yerrick/Serious Business Records

This is not a WikiProject, if only because I do not yet expect other users to participate.

The redirect page Serious business was deleted and protected. Some fans of a web site that hosts "lulz" and "internet drama", including personal attacks against editors of Wikipedia, had redirected it to Internet. Other Wikipedia editors redirected it to Serious Business Records, an article about a record label that an administrator ended up deleting for failing Wikipedia's music notability guideline after a discussion. Personally, I want it pointed to a disambiguation page that I'm drafting here, and I'm working toward building a case for a deletion review.

As part of gathering evidence for such a deletion review, I'm looking for solid evidence one way or the other as to whether Serious Business Records or any band on SBR is notable. Though SBR's article has been deleted, the articles for several bands and records associated with SBR have not, though it appears they could be. So I'm organizing an article improvement drive to settle the issue. I'll look for a bunch of articles about SBR bands and recordings, add maintenance tags to the articles lacking third-party reliable sources, and wait a couple weeks for anyone with evidence of the topics' notability to step forward. Though I am testing a hypothesis about inheritance of notability on the live site, I'm doing my best to avoid disrupting Wikipedia by not making a large number of controversial edits at once, giving SBR fans some time to improve the articles. If SBR is notable enough to have fans who watch these articles, the Wikipedia process will have worked: editors will have improved the SBR articles to Start-class or better, possibly justifying a deletion review of Serious Business Records and Serious business. If not, the Wikipedia process will still have worked: the articles weren't notable to begin with, and their deletion will not be contested.

As of Tuesday, December 4, 2007, this project is complete.

Phase 1
Search the English Wikipedia for Serious Business Records. Find articles that appear to have few or no third-party reliable sources. For example, a band's own web site, the label's, and MySpace are not third-party, and blogs that don't already have their own articles on Wikipedia are probably not reliable. At the top of each article that appears to fail the WP:MUSIC guideline, place the following maintenance templates:

Then add the article at the bottom of the schedule.

Phase 2

 * "However, for group nominations it is often a good idea to only list one article at afd and see how it goes, before listing an entire group." -- WP:BUNDLE

The first article to get these tags was Unsacred Hearts, on October 31, 2007. (The Unsacred Hearts is a band signed to SBR.) This article had already been proposed for deletion ("prodded" in Wikipedia slang) over a year and a half ago, but the deletion was contested. On November 7, a week after I added the tags, I nominated the article for a deletion discussion, giving the following reason:
 * Appears to fail WP:MUSIC notability guideline; article cites few to no third-party sources; label (Serious Business Records) has been deemed non-notable.

I created this discussion page and notified Jaysuschris (who contested the prod) and Sanyc‎ (who edited the article the most).

Per the deletion policy, if the arguments for deletion outweigh the arguments for keeping the article, an administrator will delete Unsacred Hearts on November 12. I foresee one of these outcomes:
 * Deleted: Continue to phase 3.
 * Kept and references are greatly improved: Copy added references into articles listed in phase 3 as appropriate, and adjust the list of prod-worthy articles.

Update: Administrator Tikiwont closed the discussion, deleted the article, and prodded a few more articles about the Unsacred Hearts' albums.

Phase 3
If phase 2 turns out well, start proposing deletion of one article a day. For any article on the schedule that has not been proposed for deletion, I will propose the article's deletion using {{subst:prod}} and the same reason listed in phase 2. Contested deletions get placed in a separate chunk to be mass nominated for AFD at the end.

Schedule
Candidates for proposed deletion or a deletion debate:
 * 11-13: Tikiwont prodded Five Believers, Unsacred Hearts (EP), and In Defense of Fort Useless (all were deleted)
 * 11-15: I prodded DraculaZombieUSA (deleted)
 * 11-16: I prodded Man in Gray/Unsacred Hearts (split 7") (deleted)
 * 11-17: I prodded Do Not Leave Baggage All the Way (deleted)
 * 11-18: I prodded I Can't Sleep Unless I Hear You Breathing (deleted)
 * 11-19: I prodded DraculaZombieUSA (album) (deleted)
 * 11-20: never got to Nice Fixtures

Candidates for better citation style, not deletion:
 * Man in Gray

Candidates for merge, not deletion:
 * No Day/No Night

Phase 4
????

What is done in this phase depends on how many articles disappear in phases 2 and 3. Possible outcomes include the following:
 * Mostly deleted: Request deletion review of Serious Business only
 * Mostly not deleted: Request deletion review of Serious Business and Serious Business Records, and add Serious Business Records to disambiguation page SBR

On November 23, 2007, I had Jitse Niesen move the disambiguation page. I am now in the home stretch.

Phase 5
PROFIT!!!!11