Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finest Hour (quartet)


 * 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. The strength of the nomination was insufficient to outweigh the general consensus that the topic's winning of a national competition infers notability- these arguments touched upon WP:MUSICBIO #9 (or possibly 8- the distinction is slightly fudged in this discussion), as indeed, the only 'delete' !vote acknowledged the possibility if not certainty of. (non-admin closure) &mdash; fortuna  velut luna  11:41, 3 September 2017 (UTC)

Finest Hour (quartet)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

28th ranked barbershop quartet in the world. They do not appear notable in any way ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  18:50, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:52, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete for lack of notability. WP:USUAL may apply, of course, and if they won awards that are judged notable, then you might have a case for inclusion. I mean, 28th in the world at anything is pretty impressive. But WP:NPRETTYIMPRESSIVE is a redlink, so... UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 19:42, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Responding to the below Keeps... We do have an article for the British Association of Barbershop Singers, but not one for the award in question. In most cases, if the award is notable enough for an article, then winning the award is enough to confer notability. That's not always the case, and certainly every award (and subject) is different, but that's what I was looking at. And I still don't see sources about this quartet that indicate notability. I mean, the two references are to their scores at competitions - good as far as it goes, but there's no independent sources noting those results, or explaining why they are relevant. I'm not sold on this one. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 20:12, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Another source has since been added. —ADavidB 21:36, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * True, but there the subject is shown in a photo, and the only text about the subject is the caption of that photo. It confirms that they won an award, but to say it's about Finest Hour is stretching it somewhat. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 13:15, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The source is about the barbershop genre, and notes Finest Hour's win as a current example. This WP article has expanded further with additional sources and content. —ADavidB 14:47, 17 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep – The year before their first international competition, they were judged the top quartet in the UK, establishing their notability. —ADavidB 19:45, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment - Every year since 1974 someone has won the BABS Quartet Championship, and none of them have been considered enough to get a WP page. I know that's WP:Otherstuffexists but, it is valid here. Winning an annual contest does not make a quartet notable, especially since barbershop quartets are a pretty marginal topic in the first place. My opinion. ‡ Єl Cid, Єl Caɱ̩peador  ᐐT₳LKᐬ  19:50, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Do you know that prior winning quartets have had articles submitted and rejected, or is that only a supposition? I submit that winning a national-level competition does establish a quartet's notability. —ADavidB 19:53, 10 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep per User:Adavidb. CJK09 (talk) 20:01, 10 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per User:Adavidb. jonathan123494 10:49, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 21:04, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Godric on Leave (talk) 10:10, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. If being the 28th best barbershop quartet in the world isn't wikipedia worthy then what is the point of anything Theodolite (talk) 02:55, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. North America1000 08:13, 19 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment – The lead paragraph clearly notes their 2016 win as best quartet in the UK, with a record-high score. Their international ranking is not their notability. —ADavidB 11:14, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Lots of opinions here, but I'm seeing a distinct lack of arguments which cite policy. So, relisting this in the hope of that improving.
 * Keep per above, also national winner of a competition, so to represent is quite a hurdle for participation. Sadads (talk) 13:12, 21 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Comment. Show me one non-music source talking about this group - something not related to or published by groups related to Barbershop Quartets - and I'd bean enthusiastic "Keep". But there is, as yet, nothing to indicate any notability beyond the awards shown, and those awards aren't in themselves enough. One media article along the lines of "Local quartet wins national award" or some such, and I'd be fine. I just don't see that here, unfortunately. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 15:40, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 14:00, 26 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. I see enough sources to (just) meet WP:GNG and WP:NMUSIC guidelines. There is no requirement for any 'non-music source', nor is their getting an award discounted due to the award not having an article. Despite various arguments about their world prominence, that is not relevant, the world number 124,000th quartet has an equal chance of being notable, what matters are reliable independent sources. A Guy into Books (talk) 09:25, 3 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.