Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Baskervilles


 * 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 of the debate was Delete. 11 deletes, 3 keeps, one week keep. Tipping the balance is the fact that the article text now appears to be a copyvio of http://www.baskervilles.net/narrative.php. &mdash;Bunchofgrapes (talk) 03:20, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Baskervilles
Delete NN band. Deprodded. Deleted once before on A7. Some marginal assertion of notability - albums were issued on a very obscure label. Website for the label unconvincing. - CrazyRussian talk/email 01:19, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom. TrianaC 01:26, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy G4 if it's been recreated. Delete for non-notability otherwise . Tevildo 01:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * G4 already considered and rejected, sorry. Tevildo 01:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Very Weak Keep. Thanks to recent article updates, _just about_ scraping at the boundaries of a couple of the WP:MUSIC criteria.  Obviously more notable than the typical garage band we usually have to deal with.  Not quite comfortably home yet, perhaps, but look like they might make it. Tevildo 01:35, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. From what i've researched here, it fails WP:BAND AdamBiswanger1 01:34, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails WP:BAND. --Coredesat 02:05, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, but if that picture has an appropriate license it should go to WP:BJAODN. Peyna 03:17, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per MUSIC, "Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable). T e  k e  03:35, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Inner Earth 09:00, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and recreate as a redirect to The Hound of the Baskervilles. &mdash;Lamentation ( 14:07, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete -- as above -- MrDolomite 14:18, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Hi, please do not delete this, Baskervilles are a very good band, they have over one thousand listeners on last.fm (a music blogging service people can sign up for that counts all the songs you listen to), you can check this here (look to the top left of the screen and it says how many listeners they have) .  Baskervilles have also recorded a music video you can watch it here... .  The albums by Baskervilles are available on the massivley popular online store Amazon.com, you can check this out here  and here .  Also when you search for 'baskervilles' on google.com, the first thing that comes up is a link to their album download (which is available also on itunes) and a link to their official website .  Their first two cd's WERE on an indie record label but they sold very well, they are going to be releasing their next record on a swedish label 'kitty litter records'. There are lots of bands signed to indie labels on wikipedia 'From Bubblegum To Sky' being a prime example of this, so is musician 'Tess Wiley' her albums have also been onyl released on indie record labels and on her wikipedia site (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tess_Wiley) there isnt even a list of her discography please consider leaving this up.

I have now updated the article with even more information. Frombubblegumtosky


 * Delete - per nom. -- Kungfu Adam ( talk ) 20:01, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as missing WP:MUSIC - no national tours (the example given by the user above of Tess Wiley is bad, as she was actually a member of Sixpence None The Richer), no records other than the two on a small indie label... not quite there yet. Tony Fox (speak) 20:22, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * comment Actually Tess Wiley was only a member of Sixpence None The Richer for one year, and she only released one CD with them 'This Beautiful Mess', and that was on a small indie record label called 'Rex Music', they did not acieve major success until many years later, also my other example 'From Bubblegum To Sky' is a good example, he has only released two cd's on an indie label, also 'Freezepop' is a good example, they are also on an indie label, heck, the members of the band 'Freezepop' still sell cd's on their website and post them out themselves. Baskervilles, while they are not the most popular band (they are one of my favourites), they have lots of listeners and fans, and i think they deserve a wikipedia article. also sorry about my edits on this page, i'm not very good at this coding stufffrombubblegumtosky
 * Frankly, From Bubblegum to Sky looks like it misses WP:MUSIC too. (Anyone else think so?) As for Ms. Wiley, she's done international tours, as part of a notable band, and thus does meet the notability requirements. And Freezepop has had songs used in internationally popular video games. Please, read the music notability requirements. If you can make this band meet them, fire away. Tony Fox (speak) 22:32, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, and please don't 'vote' (this is not a vote) more than once in the discussion. I've struck your second keep. Tony Fox (speak) 22:33, 23 June 2006 (UTC)


 * KEEP Great band, please keep this up hAnkyPhexTwin — Preceding unsigned comment added by 128.196.241.129 (talk • contribs)


 * comment that's my point Tony Fox, both 'From Bubblegum To Sky' and 'Baskervilles', although on indie labels, are very popular bands, information should be available on here about them, banning bands on indie labels from the wikipedia site is like banning movie info for films that were straight to dvd, Baskervilles have been mentioned in the london metro (the free newspaper you get on trains and buses) also the band have played out of new york city "The group made one trip outside of New York City in the summer of 2002 to perform at a museum opening at the Migros Museum in Zurich, Switzerland featuring the artwork of Yayoi Kusama and Michel Auder" they have lots of fans and their label, have got their music available in so many places, you can pick up their cd's in regular stores and in most popular onlien stores, heres a list of notable stores that sell baskervilles cds/mp3s... Emusic, ITunes, Amazon.com, AOL Music Now, Buy.com, Tower Records (and towerrecords.com), i mean, if the label they were signed to was really small, the baskervilles CD's wouldn;t have such a large distribution.Frombubblegumtosky
 * This is discussion, not a vote, so there's no need to try to stuff the ballot. Consider using Comment instead if you have more to say. : ) Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 23:51, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

comment well firstly, if it's not a vote then why does it matter if i put KEEP at the beggining of my sentence? i just put it there so people know my text is about keeping the article on Baskervilles on the site, i've never done this before and i know little about the technicalities, i put together the Baskervilles article mostly by copying and pasting codes, i'm just trying to get my point across on why i think it should stay here. Frombubblegumtosky
 * Because the initial term of 'delete' or 'keep' (and others) expresses the general idea of comment the post is about to make reguarding the article. Repeatedly posting multiple comments where you intend your summary to be a 'keep' is misleeding to the administrator who has to review this. Kevin_b_er 00:05, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Let me put it this way: it's not a vote in the sense that if X% of people say "keep" or "delete", that will determine the outcome of the discussion. However, the closing administrator does look for some sort of consensus, and repeated bolded use of the word "keep" by one contributor could confuse the administrator into thinking one side had more support than it did. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 00:49, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

comment sigh... yes, but if this is not a vote, then it doesn't matter how many times keep is written, because it's not like the administrator is counting them, and as you can clearly see i do not oppose this anyway, i already changed all my keeps to comments before you even wrote your message, anyway, i don;t think theres any point in arguing when i already did as asked, just please read the POINTS i am making on why this should be kept, as they are very good and a lot of the delete comments made here are pretty lame Frombubblegumtosky

comment wait a second, it says at the top "This is a discussion among Wikipedia editors " does that mean that only what you lot think counts to whether this gets deleted or not? Frombubblegumtosky


 * Don't be offended. However, often new users are unfamiliar with our deletion policies, and occasionally someone tells their friends about a deletion, who come and could make it appear that one side had more support. Thus, the closing administrators (who decide the outcome of the debate) often ignore the opinions of new or unregistered users. However, you are encouraged to express your views, and may convince other users in your favor. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 00:44, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

comment so it is true then? unless i convince the majority of the editors, it'll get deleted? it's not like wikipedia is getting published to a book, i think the rules of wikipedia mean its hugely limiting itsself on how much information it can contain, when i first found wikipedia, i thought "heres a site where you can find everything" i guess i was wrong, i mean, blocking posting of information that is pointless and unknown is one thing, but to not allow an article on a band that are popular and that have two cd's released that are widely available in music stores in the usa and in dozens of popular online stores, thats not a good idea.Frombubblegumtosky


 * Just trying to explain procedure. You might want to cite WP:NOT. And not necessarily a majority of editors, it's really up to the closing administrator. Sometimes, debates end with a "lack of consensus". Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 01:14, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

Radio Plays It seems they have been played on a radio station, check this link out KEXP 90.3FM i'm not certain as to how popular this radio station is, as i live in the uk. Frombubblegumtosky


 * Keep Seems to have been improved since being listed on AfD, and is relatively well-referenced. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 01:16, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


 * comment lol, it's not like i know anyone from the band or anything, i just really like these guys, i think theyre awesome, they have a 4 track EP coming out on kitty litter records in july, and they have a new album due out later this year too, while they haven't hit massive MAINSTREAM success yet, i think they are well known enough to be on wikipedia. Frombubblegumtosky


 * comment i have just added more info, by including information on a Baskervilles side project 'Autoparty' i have added the link to their radio performance also (which the radio station recorded and have put online available to stream) from what i gather its quite a popular radio station. Please please let this stay, oh Evolving Artist Internet Television have been playing the Baskervilles music video for a while now too. Evolving Artist Internet Television show music videos from many other popular artists like Bright Eyes, Buzzcocks, Death Cab For Cutie, Goldfrapp, Mates Of State, NOFX, and a ton more, that website even produces its own internet television series! Frombubblegumtosky
 * Keep per Armedblowfish but tag for wikify/cleanup - kill the non-NPOV/add some paragraphing/linkage - and use # instead of manual track numbers. I also don't care how much their download CD costs. Remove the blatant record shop ad link/WP:NOT vio. They squeak in WP:MUSIC. --DaveG12345 04:09, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


 * comment i've paragraphd the text and removed the cd shop link, i really have no idea what else you meant, i am only just learning how to edit wikipedia and am unfamiliar with most of the terms, do you mean put a # at the beggining of the track names instead of numbers? and what do you mean by "Kill the non-NPOV"? Frombubblegumtosky


 * You might find how to edit a page helpful. NPOV means "Neutral point of view", so "non-NPOV" means biased. See WP:NPOV. It's generally not a criteria for deletion, since it's almost always fixable. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 17:56, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


 * Another reccomendation: put links that are were actually used to write the article or check facts in a "References" section, instead of a "External links" section, per WP:EL. A lot of people ignore that guideline, so in AfDs I normally assume "External links" are references, but its a good idea for keeping track of what is necessary to verify the material, and what is just extra reading for convenience. Armedblowfish (talk|mail|contribs) 18:03, 24 June 2006 (UTC)


 * comment Ah ok got it the # key automatically numbers them, ok i've changed that too. Frombubblegumtosky
 * Comment Good work. The article still needs wikifying. You will find some pointers on what to wikify here, especially in this section and its links. --DaveG12345 04:13, 25 June 2006 (UTC)
 * THEY MEET WP:MUSIC CRITERIA! hey again, i just checked WP:MUSIC and they meet one of the criteria "Has been the subject of a half hour or hour broadcast on a national radio network." look above for the link (or on the article page in the 'external links' at the bottom) They played 14 songs, live, on KEXP 90.3FM, a national readio station, so they meet the WP:MUSIC criteria. You can even listen to a bit of it at the radio stations website HEREFrombubblegumtosky
 * KEXP is not a "national radio network"; it's a single station. &mdash;Lamentation ( 10:36, 26 June 2006 (UTC)
 * comment drats, lol, oh well :( Frombubblegumtosky
 * I'm invoking Benford's Law of Controversy. T e  k e  04:49, 27 June 2006 (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.