Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bang Shang a Lang


 * 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 no consensus. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  09:31, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

Bang Shang a Lang

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Stated plainly, this is an article about a band that was not notable when the page was created nor has anything demonstrated their significance years later. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:38, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:35, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:36, 7 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. has a record of excellent content including FAs. This is one of her first creations and I'm sure she's forgotten all about it. Anyway, I really can't see how it could possibly meet WP:BAND. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 09:46, 7 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Non-committed. Kudpung is correct above; I created this article as a stub when I was working on The Wiggles, my very first FA, in the interest of thoroughness.  I did forget about it, mostly because they don't even perform anymore; plus, Murray Cook has retired from The Wiggles, anyway.  The band's mentioned enough in other articles, so I'm fine with its deletion. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:23, 7 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep. Passes WP:BAND#6. The ensemble has two notable members: Murray Cook (who does have a WP article) of the Wiggles and Clyde Bramley - although he doesn't have his own article he is a former member of four (or more) notable bands, which do have WP articles.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 23:29, 10 September 2017 (UTC)04:30, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It sounds like they were members of notable bands but they themselves were not notable. Remember WP:NOTINHERITED. Why would we want to keep an article that absolutely fails WP:GNG? Here is an interesting quote from WP:NBAND: "Note that this criterion needs to be interpreted with caution, as there have been instances where this criterion was cited in a WP:CIRCULAR manner to create a self-fulfilling notability loop".TheGracefulSlick (talk) 00:29, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Comments
 * Since you claim that Cook is not notable, does this mean you are saying that Cook's article should be deleted?
 * "self-fulfilling notability loop": that would apply if I argued that Cook's notability can be used to establish the Wiggles' notability, which in turn means that Cook is notable. Cook is independently notable. I argue that both Cook and Bramley are notable, both are members of notable bands. Criterion #6 is applicable in this situation and my case does not form such a loop.
 * WP:GNG applies to "general" situations. WP:BAND applies "specifically" to musicians or ensembles that's why they have different criteria. You're trying to argue for some sort of hierarchy of notability in that all bands must pass GNG, even if they pass BAND – I don't recognise any such hierarchy.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 04:30, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Cook is borderline but Bramley is certainly not independently notable. A search for coverage about him, not the bands he was a part of, brought up nothing. Surely if he were a notable musician someone would have written something about him, wouldn't you agree?TheGracefulSlick (talk) 06:03, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * According to WP:BAND#6 Bramley is notable because he is a former member of four notable bands. You're using some other standard.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:52, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I am also applying the "may be notable if they meet at least one" part -- not will be. The fact that the only claim made for notability is two borderline noteworthy members, one of whom who is not the subject of an article, is a good indicator that this band is not notable. A little common sense needs to be applied to avoid indiscriminate inclusion of topics. Excluding the first and final sentence, the article discusses other bands or endeavors the members were included in. You'll have to do a lot of original research to extract any significant content about this group.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 15:49, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I disagree with your interpretation. YKMV (metric for YMMV): I don't believe this article's inclusion is indiscriminate.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 02:20, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 03:03, 14 September 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 09:01, 21 September 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. 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.