Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/13th GMA Dove Awards


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep.  bibliomaniac 1  5  02:39, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

13th GMA Dove Awards

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable awards ceremony. It's had a sourcing banner on it since 2010 that never got dealt with and a WP:BEFORE search fails to come up with anything. Maybe it could be merged into GMA Dove Award, but there isn't anything to merge. Since the article is essentially devoid of content. Adamant1 (talk) 14:34, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Tennessee-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 14:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)


 * Keep The notability of the ceremony here is not related to the use references. Walter Görlitz (talk) 17:26, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Comment, What's the notability related to then? There isn't currently any solid guidelines about the notability of ceremonies or awards from my understanding. So it goes to the WP:GNG guidelines. Which requires the use of references. Otherwise, any ceremony or award would be notable by default, no matter how mundane it might be. I'm not even saying the ceremony itself isn't notability anyway, I'm just saying this particular article about it isn't. Those are two different things. If there's going to be a spin off article of a subject it has to be justified. An essentially blank page isn't. Wikipedia isn't a directory. --Adamant1 (talk) 19:18, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * So the BEFORE you did, was that through print publications from 1982, because that's where you're going to find the publicity for this particular event? All detailed at Wikipedia:Notability (events). It's disingenuous of you to suggest anything else was thorough. I'm expecting a thorough review of CCM Magazine back-issues, Campus Life, Cornerstone and other publications that would have covered this. I suspect you did a simple Google search. As for what's the notability, it was in the press at the time but I don't have access to the sources. The awards that were distributed that night are are detailed at the Dove Awards past winners page and this page, the latter is not a RS though, but suspect it could be used for the nominations alone. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:40, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * What's disingenuous is voting keep because supposedly the existence of sources don't matter to notability, and then berating another user about how thoroughly they searched for sources you claim aren't important. Do the existence of sources matter or don't they? Also, plenty of articles about historical events (if that's your notability claim) are well sourced from Google searches, because the topics are actually notable. Not that I'm saying that's all I did. I sure as hell didn't sift through a bunch of 80s high-school teen mags (that probably don't cover the subject in-depth anyway) before doing the AfD. Your rant about it is a good example of WP:SOURCESMAYEXIST though. Finally, neither of your sources work for establishing notability. Maybe go find some that do by sifting thorough old teen mags or something. I don't really care. It's at least better then just going off, hand-waving, or attacking other users. --Adamant1 (talk) 21:55, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete. The only citation is a non-independent WP:PRIMARYSOURCE. A Google search turned up two newspaper clippings, 1 and 2 from The Tennessean, the first of which is effectively an advertisement. Fails WP:GNG. Narky Blert (talk) 13:28, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep per Walter Gorlitz, who seems to be the only one who knows what they are doing here. -Roxy, the PROD. . wooF 15:32, 5 April 2020 (UTC)
 * What it is that he's doing exactly? It seems to me the main reason he voted keep is a personal grudge. He didn't even bother to provide the magazine sources to establish notability that he claims exist. Just making vague assertions of potential notability isn't enough. So I'd love to know what it is that both of you know that makes this notable that we don't. Your suppose to say why you think something is notable or not in a vote anyway, and not just defer to another user. --Adamant1 (talk) 15:08, 6 April 2020 (UTC)
 * A personal grudge? Could it be that the article is on my watchlist and I know where to look for sources but have no access to those print editions? Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:55, 11 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Id go for that if it wasnt for your prior actions and the way you treated me in relation to other edits done to Christian articles. Although that aside, personally I dont think keep arguements like "hey we should keep this because I seem to remember the topic being discussed somewhere. Although I cant provide a source or even tell you exactly where/when it was" kind of weak. Any AfD could be kept on that standard. Your free to disagree though. Obviously everyone judges notability different. For some hunches of notability are fine, for others like me, not so much. --Adamant1 (talk) 17:04, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Discussion doesn't seem done, and consensus hasn't been reached

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CaptainEek  Edits Ho Cap'n!⚓ 02:23, 15 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete There is only one primary source in the external links. Only one independent secondary source has been presented in this AfD . However this seems to be a routine announcement, which is akin to public relations. It is not significant coverage. This is not enough to demonstrate notability. Please see WP:ORGDEPTH. Multiple independent sources that provide significant coverage are needed. Saying there might be sources somewhere or there should be sources somewhere does not demonstrate notability. Fails GNG, NMEDIA, ORG.---Steve Quinn (talk) 02:41, 17 April 2020 (UTC)

Keep per the significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources.     </li> </ol>

<ol> <li> The article notes: "Sandi Patti, a former music student who was virtually unknown a year ago, was named gospel music's artist of the year and top female vocalist at the 13th annual Dove Awards. Dottie Rambo and the Imperials won two Dove statues -- gospel music's equivalent to the Grammy Awards -- Wednesday. The winners were selected by the Gospel Music Association's 3,000 members. ... Russ Taff was named top male vocalist for the second year in a row and B.J. Thomas won a Dove Award for gospel album of the year by a secular artist for his 'Amazing Grace' album. ... The 2 -hour ceremony at Opryland Hotel was sprinkled with references to religion and God, but some poked fun at the gospel-oriented crowd. Grady Nutt, a regular on the television show 'Hee Haw,' brought a huge roar of laughter from the crowd. 'If God doesn't have a sense of humor, I'm in trouble,' Nutt said. 'I know he has a sense of humor because he invented Baptists.'"</li> <li> The article notes: "Sandi Patti, Dottie Rambo and the Imperials each won two Dove Awards at last night's 13th annual presentation, with Patti taking top honors as gospel music's artist of the year. ... she whoed the crowd of 800 last night why she has become so popular so fast. ... Hee Haw regular Grady Nutt emceed the show and provided a constant flow of humor that other award shows would envy. 'We all know this is just an uptown version of all day singing and dinner on the ground,' Nutt said at the beginning of the night. Most of his monologues continued in that vein, examining the gospel music's roots—the primary one being out on Route 2, he said. ... Wendy Bagwell also contributed some humor with a comic monologue, cut short he said because he and his group had to get down to Opp, Ala., where they were playing a filling station opening this morning."</li> <li> The article notes: "Sandi Patti, the self-proclaimed new kid on the block, was awarded the top Gospel Music Assn. (GMA) honor last week when she was named Artist of the Year during the 13th annual Dove Awards. Patti also took Female Vocalist of the Year honors during the two-and-a-half hour awards program at the Opryland Hotel here. The Imperials were also honored with two awards: Gospel Group of the Year and Contemporary Gospel Album of the Year for its 'Priority' album, produced by Michael Omartian. The well-produced, smooth flowing awards program, hosted by humorist Grady Nutt, whose downhome sense of humor was one of the highlights of the evening, featured 18 awards presented and inductions into the Gospel Hall of Fame in two different categories, plus a special slate of inductees. In the living category, Thomas A. Dorsey joined 11 other members in the Hall of Fame, while in the Deceased category, John T. Benson, Sr. was inducted. This year, for the first time in 10 years, there was also a special slate of inductees, which included Charles Gabriel, Haldor Lillenas, B.B. McKinney, Lowell Mason and John Newton."</li> <li> The article notes: "Impact Records artist Sandi Patti, a relative newcomer to the gospel music field, won the gospel artist of the year and the female vocalist of the year honors at the 13th annual Dove Awards ceremony held here Wednesday (3). The event capped the Gospel Music Assn.'s Gospel Music Week activities. Patti gained her first national visibility last year touring with the Bill Gaither Trio and through her initial album for Impact, 'Love Overflowing.' In taking the gospel artist prize, she edged out veterans Cynthia Clawson, Andrae Crouch, Dallas Holm and the Imperials. The other Dove honors and their winners were: [long list of winners]"</li> <li> The book notes: "In March 1982, Thomas A. Dorsey became the first black elected to the GMA Hall of Fame."</li>

There is sufficient coverage in reliable sources to allow the 13th GMA Dove Awards to pass Notability, which requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Cunard (talk) 09:08, 21 April 2020 (UTC)</li></ul>
 * Keep although the present article is merely a skeleton saying nothing much, the topic itself is notable. We have trouble finding online sources because the Internet was so young back then! But magazines covered the topic as found by Cunard. The content in them is substantial and independent. So WP:GNG is met. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:57, 21 April 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.