Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daynes Music


 * 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. No arguments for deletion, nomination wothdrawn. Davewild (talk) 10:08, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Daynes Music

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I am in two minds about this one but I think we need to discuss it. It is a promotional article with peacock language about a local music store with some local media coverage but I am not seeing really significant coverage in national media, just quite a few of passing mentions. There is possibly some claim to notability given the longevity but I am not sure if it is enough. The promotional tone is fixable, of course, so it all hinges on notability. If it was the oldest in the whole USA, maybe, but the oldest in Utah? I don't know. DanielRigal (talk) 00:28, 16 October 2011 (UTC) Nomination withdrawn --DanielRigal (talk) 10:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Notability is a very slippery slope, and a "national scope" of notability is not strictly necessary for Wikipedia (although helpful in establishing notability). The strictest definition of notability requires at least two outside sources, which I generally interpret as at least two substantive articles about a topic from generally reliable sources.  Local news media can count toward that sort of coverage.
 * The whole point of notability is that an article simply can't be written based upon a single point of view if you want to be able to stick to the five pillars and produce a reasonable article. If you can find more sources on a topic, it becomes all that much better and preferably completely different publications from different points of view as well from which to hopefully derive a neutral point of view.
 * There are whole Wikipedia editions with groups of speakers smaller than the population of the state of Utah, so I think it is incredibly subjective in terms of what the scope of notability ought to be for Wikipedia, other than there should be multiple sources of information for any article. Counting sources is something which can be objective, as well as noting the quality of the sources being used for that count.  Just because somebody in New York City or San Francisco may not have heard about a topic should not be the yardstick for measurement of if that article ought to be included in Wikipedia.
 * At the moment, I count three different sources of information about this business in the article itself, on top of the L.A. Times and Chicago Tribute articles. That seems to hit the strict number of articles required by WP:NOTE and thus can be considered notable.  The stuff from the store website ought to be considered self-published, or certainly held with a jaundiced view of mainly being used for objective and verifiable facts like the year it was established.  That there may be other problems with the article, I'd agree, but that doesn't seem to imply a reason to delete this article and it certainly doesn't fail notability.  All this suggests is perhaps it needs a major rewrite or restructuring based upon those sources.  --Robert Horning (talk) 19:48, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Would it be appropriate to start finding and swapping out those references from the Daynes website for ones in other non Daynes publications/websites? 101heather (talk) 18:04, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * yes, in fact it would be a good thing. the better you can make the article look now, the better chance it has of surviving this afd.&mdash; alf.laylah.wa.laylah (talk) 18:50, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Done. I changed all reference from daynesmusic.com and removed anything I thought could be taken as puffery.101heather (talk) 22:47, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

Notability
Daniel, thank you for opening this up for discussion. My intentions were not to promote, so help from others is very much appreciated. This is my first attempt at creating a new article. I found Daynes Music a good candidate for a Wikipedia page because it is: I do think that using references like LA Times or Chicago Tribune, though small, would have helped to show the significance is noted outside of Utah. I do feel it is notable enough to have an article, but perhaps my inexperience in showing that significance is at fault. http://articles.latimes.com/2002/apr/14/news/mn-37871 http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2002-02-15/news/0202150186_1_mormon-utah-olympics 101heather (talk) 01:51, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Second oldest music store in the entire United States (the oldest west of Mississippi)
 * The oldest Steinway dealer in the United States
 * 76th oldest family run business in the United States


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Utah-related deletion discussions.  —DanielRigal (talk) 00:50, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 00:50, 16 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 00:50, 16 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep looks well-sourced to me. Stuartyeates (talk) 01:53, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

The article has improved, and nobody at all has voted delete in several days, so it looks like I called this one wrong. I'm withdrawing my nomination and anybody who knows how to close the AfD can do so. --DanielRigal (talk) 10:06, 23 October 2011 (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.