Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Columbia Chorale


 * 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 03:07, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Columbia Chorale

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Contested PROD. Community orchestra choral group fails to meet notability criteria of WP:BAND. Lacks depth of coverage in reliable secondary sources. Uncle Dick (talk) 15:33, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Procedural objection The nomination is ill formed. The nominator apparently did not read the article, since it is about a chorus of people who sing, and not an orchestra in which people play instruments.  Edison (talk) 19:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Amended. Seriously? Uncle Dick (talk) 19:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Absolutely and deadly serious. Now that you have actually read the article (or at least my complaint), considered that singing versus playing a musical instrument are different actions, and amended the nomination, have you looked for newspaper articles about the group? I found several, as you should have done WP:BEFORE nominating an article you don't like. How do you evaluate the newspaper articles in light of WP:N, and WP:BAND? Edison (talk) 01:01, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * My evaluation remains unchanged. Columbia Chorale does not meet any of the criteria per WP:BAND, and thus far no one has indicated otherwise. Furthermore, may I direct your attention to WP:AGF before you impugn my motives and assume that I "don't like" this article, or that my mischaracterization of the group's primary mode of instrumentation was a result of negligence/laziness and not a simple accident? Uncle Dick (talk) 03:32, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

I looked at the WP:Band guidelines and although it may not meet every criteria it meets many of the guidelines. I added the links to the broadcasts done by KBIA and Reynolds Journalism Institute which the conductor is one of the panelists on the show "Intersection". In the WP:Band guidelines it says; Has been the subject of a half-hour or longer broadcast across a national radio or TV network. It has also been on KOMU TV. So once again I would like to argue with Uncle Dicks motion to delete this page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Clearviewfarms (talk • contribs) 13:21, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * While the KBIA broadcast does mention Columbia Chorale, the "Intersection" program is locally-produced for a local audience and does not represent a "broadcast across a national radio or TV network." I think the best bet for establishing notability for this article is WP:BAND criteria 7: "Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city." If reliable sources can be found to demonstrate this, there would be a good argument for keeping the article. Uncle Dick (talk) 18:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep Notable on a purely local level. It has gotten regular coverage (not just calendar announcements) from the local paper, the Columbia Tribune, although virtually no other source. The Columbia Tribune appears to be a reliable source under Wikipedia guidelines. I personally think that notability for Wikipedia purposes should have to be more than local - it should be at least regional - but I have lost that argument on several occasions and in this case I think the article is defensible. --MelanieN (talk) 23:43, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete Sources prove it exists, and little else. We know it isn't a hoax, but I fail to see anything in the sources I have access to that goes beyond "they exist." Community papers cover local acts, it's part of their function. I don't see any regional coverage, which would be a better indication of importance, and there is no national coverage at all. Fails to satisfy me for WP:N. Sven Manguard  Talk  21:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: I am counting the community paper as being a trivial source. Community papers are written at a very low level, and cater only to the community. Stories are written on all local events, often by hobby journalists rather than true professionals, and coverage in an issue is often done on request. This is the same reason I discount school papers as being non-trivial. Sven Manguard  Talk  22:00, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Delete though they've been around awhile, I don't see anything that actually passes WP:MUSIC or WP:ORG. They exist, and that's about it. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  03:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The question is whether there are ""multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician or ensemble itself." MelanieN says above that this group has had repeated significant coverage in the Columbia Daily Tribune. The "reliability" or "triviality" of a source does not ramp up and down depending on whether you like the subject of their coverage. Sven Manguard needs some references to back up his disparagement of "the most widely circulated newspaper in Mid-Missouri" (per  Columbia Daily Tribune) as a trivial operation by "hobby journalists" who are not "true professionals"  and who print whatever anyone requests,  Edison (talk) 04:22, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete. I see a feature on the Columbia Chorale's conductor, but the Chorale itself doesn't really seem to feature very prominently in it. Other articles look to me to be brief, "Columbia Chorale kick off the winter season" type mentions, not real coverage that establishes notability.  I accept the Columbia Tribune as a non-trivial source, but the coverage doesn't look at all significant to me.  However, I limited myself to searches for the Chorale and the Tribune, to avoid false hits from a Columbia Chorale in Oregon, so I'm willing to accept there may be other sources I'm not seeing. Some jerk on the Internet (talk) 23:42, 12 October 2010 (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.