User talk:Fantartic

Welcome!
Hello, Fantartic, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!  Hut 8.5  13:06, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

V05 (band)
The major obstacle to Wikipedia having an article on this band is that they don't appear to meet the notability criteria for bands. As they haven't appeared on charts, been signed by a major record label, etc, that basically comes down to whether the band has been the subject of significant coverage in third-party reliable sources. Things like student newspapers or self-published blogs are not going to be sufficient for this. We don't use Facebook members or YouTube views as evidence of notability.

The best I can offer here is to turn the article into a userspace draft for you to work on it to improve it to the point where it shows the subject does meet our standards, but for that I'd like to see some indications of the kind of improvements you'd like to make. Alternatively you can appeal further to deletion review.  Hut 8.5  13:06, 17 September 2016 (UTC) - I understand that there is room for interpreting the criteria. But if notability is the main deficiency, here are arguments for non-deletion which seem most objective (and in comparison with the hundreds of bands in wikipedia with less recognition).

A) "Subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works"  Front-page & multi-page print article in Wisconsin State Journal, the major state-wide newspaper with daily printed circulation of 100,000 : "V05 still shaking it at age 10, with first original album"   http://host.madison.com/wsj/entertainment/v-still-shaking-it-at-age-with-first-original-album/article_d323408e-8839-5980-a2c7-cce0d63683ae.html Likewise, long articles in The Isthmus (print circulation 50,000 weekly)) and Maximum Ink (print circulation 25,000) mentioned and are not student newspapers or blogs and have state-wide appeal.

B) "Has been placed in rotation nationally by a major radio or music television network." 8 week rotation on MTVu, available on most digital cable subscription (like Charter Cable) nationally "VO5 Wins This Round Of The Freshmen" http://www.mtvu.com/music/vo5-wins-this-round-of-the-freshmen/

C) "Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city" . Featured on Wisconsin Public Television's acclaimed "30-minute Music Hour" Aired: 11/17/2015 on 12 stations covering the entire state of Wisconsin. Ten-piece disco music revivalists from Madison, WI playing original songs from their new album titled "Dance Originality" with funk, jazz and Latin influences. http://video.wpt.org/video/2365611094/ Fantartic (talk) 15:07, 19 September 2016 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the late response, I'm a little busy in real life at the moment. Most of these arguments aren't likely to get you very far because they were already brought up in the deletion discussion - for instance the Wisconsin State Journal article was included in the article that was deleted and the MTVu inclusion wasn't considered to meet the rotation requirement. I suggest you take this to deletion review if you want it to be reviewed.  Hut 8.5  18:39, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

OK. Thanks. I'll send it to review. My points were that statements made by editors were undeniably uninformed, as if they didn't take the time to check out sources ("MTVu is only for college dorms", "band hasn't had press outside city on major newspaper", "known only in one city", "cover band"). I see tons of bands without popular videos, large-scale articles on big newspapers, nationwide blog reviews or thousands of fans which seem to pass the deletion test.... Anyhow, thanks for your admirable time and efforts on wikipedia editing. Fantartic (talk) 17:26, 21 September 2016 (UTC)


 * I'd advise you to stay away from the argument that "this other band has an article and I don't think they meet the criteria". Possibly they really don't meet the criteria and the article would be deleted if someone nominated it. Possibly the band does meet the criteria but the article doesn't make that clear.  Hut 8.5  21:21, 21 September 2016 (UTC)

Maybe some of these stats would make a difference. "Along with 1000's of college radio plays and over 100,000 Spotify listens, VO5 songs have appeared on these broadcast channels/shows: MTVu (255 plays, rotation for 8 weeks), Video Diversity (NE US Cable show), Video Hits (Rochester, NY), Video Jam (NE US), California Music Channel (Oakland), The Pulse TV Network (Las Vegas), Bronx Cablevision, Manhattan MNN, Brooklyn BCAT, Cuttin Edge (Dayton, Ohio), TheCoolTV (Ohio), FoxTraxx (Wisconsin), RnRTV (Baltimore) PCMusic (Canada), H2o Television (NY). In addition, the VO5 youtube channel (https://www.youtube.com/c/vo5band) has over 600,000 views and and an active worldwide facebook fan base." Fantartic (talk) 17:55, 7 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I really doubt it. Plays on college radio or a bunch of minor cable shows aren't going to be considered by anyone as evidence of notability. People will care even less about Spotify, YouTube or Facebook.  Hut 8.5  19:05, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough, you have a strong opinion about "notability" but your standard of band "notability" seems to be at odds with most of what I see in wikipedia. Maybe your opinion is that half the band pages SHOULD be deleted, which is reasonable. Taking a random sample, I'd venture that most bands in wikipedia have achieved less notability than VO5 considering VO5's 1) long front-page coverage in their state's biggest newspaper 2) a video on MTVu which won a competition, aired for 8 weeks and reached millions of viewers nationwide 3) over 500,000 views of their music on youtube 4) 11 years of performance experience. Maybe your emphasis is on having a label, an article in "Pitchfork", nation-wide touring and having a song in the Billboard charts but if so it doesn't agree with the current standard I see in wikipedia. And VO5 does meet the minimum guidelines. Fantartic (talk) 20:41, 12 December 2016 (UTC)


 * Yes, I'm sure there are plenty of non-notable bands with Wikipedia articles. That really has no bearing here - their articles would also be deleted if someone nominated them for deletion. I have just tried your suggestion of looking at a random selection of band articles, and I don't agree with your assessment. The first few I picked includes Buzz (band), which won a number of high-profile awards, The Black Box Revelation, which apparently has coverage in The New York Times, and Alliage (band), which featured prominently on national charts. Those are all much more impressive than anything claimed for V05.  Hut 8.5  22:37, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your input. How random was your sample? My "random" sample was picking a city (in my case Portland) and looking at 10 bands... 5 were not any more notable than VO5. Portland Bands: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Musical_groups_from_Portland,_Oregon In any case, how many bands play for their US Senator and TV ads are shown for weeks by the state's ex-Governor with them playing in the background (causing political controversy)? National news in USA top nationwide gay magazine mentioning VO5: Thompson Campaign Leader Attacks Baldwin Over Gay Pride Event http://www.advocate.com/politics/election/2012/09/07/thompson-campaign-leader-attacks-baldwin-over-gay-pride-event. That by itself is notable :) "The email included a link to a video of Baldwin dancing in 2010 with the costumed disco band VO5 playing the ‘Wonder Woman’ theme. Baldwin, wearing sunglasses, dances on stage with the band and at the end hugs the singer, who is dressed like the comic book hero Wonder Woman." ... this was big news in other nationwide left-leaning papers.

Baldwin attacked over sexual orientation in Senate race http://www.washingtonblade.com/2012/09/11/baldwin-attacked-over-sexual-orientation-in-senate-race/ "The email, a copy of which was obtained by the Washington Blade, contains a link to a YouTube video showing Baldwin waiving her arms while dancing on a stage with the popular Wisconsin rock band VO5. "

Fantartic (talk) 18:13, 13 December 2016 (UTC)


 * I got my sample by using a tool to generate a list of all articles in subcategories of Category:Musical groups and then picking entries from that, but even going with your method I don't agree with what you've said. I've gone through all the artists listed under "B" in Category:Musical groups from Portland, Oregon and most of them had either a chart appearance or were signed to a notable label, either of which is more impressive than what's been cited for V05. That's not to say the others weren't notable - a number of them cited plenty of critical attention which would certainly suggest notability. The fact that a US Representative once danced to a track from a band certainly does not make them notable, and the band is scarcely mentioned at all in the source you've linked to.  Hut 8.5  19:47, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

OK, we'll agree to disagree. Thanks for your extra time sampling. Just as sanity check I just randomly checked 1 band from the list. Came up with https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Floater_(band) (not kidding) Yet again, no chart record and no major label (label should really not matter...tons of band like OK GO just start their own "label"...labels are much less important) Tons and tons of bands like Floater are on wikipedia that wouldn't meet your standards. Fantartic (talk) 23:14, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

And it wasn't just "a US Representative once danced to a track" as you write. A US Senator danced at a live performance of the band. Footage of that performance was used by the Senator's opponent (a state governor also running US Senate--only 2 per state) in statewide TV ads, showing VO5, to show how gay and out of touch their opponent was. It backfired as it became national news and Senator Baldwin won (she was a US Representative running for US Senate).Fantartic (talk) 00:36, 14 December 2016 (UTC)


 * It's a bit much to connect this particular event with Baldwin winning the election - your sources don't say that at all - and more importantly the sources in question scarcely mention V05. What is needed is "significant coverage" of the subject, and a mention to say that they exist and wear costumes isn't enough. At best this incident should be covered in the article about that Wisconsin election, and it may well be too trivial for that. It certainly doesn't make V05 notable.  Hut 8.5  07:35, 14 December 2016 (UTC)