Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Gary Havoc & The Hurricanes


 * 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. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 19:17, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Gary Havoc & The Hurricanes

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not verifiably meet WP:NBAND, possible WP:HOAX. Discogs lists one album. The artist's own website has no discography on it. Worldcat lists the same album. In short, I think all the material in the article is made-up. If Havoc worked on Xena, I should be able to find a credit (not that it matters to the band). I should be able to find internationally-known artists from the 1980s. I can't find anything after 1979 in NZ, even. Created by SPA. MSJapan (talk) 04:14, 19 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment, I'm sure the group isn't made up. The NZ Nat library holds a copy. There are also copies for sale on some websites. In discogs the contributors to the page are established plus one Discoger who owns a copy has a history going back to 2009. And as far as Havoc having worked on Xena, it's likely that Havoc is his stage name. He probably goes by his given name. After all, New Zealand's Russell Crowe, (Sorry Aussies but Crowe was born in NZ) was known as Russ Le Roq in his days on the NZ music scene and probably give or take a couple of years, was in the same era. Karl Twist (talk) 10:21, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. GSS  (talk) 15:54, 19 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete, absolutely nothing notable about this group and fails WP:NBAND (Ajf773 (talk) 09:01, 20 June 2016 (UTC))
 * Keep for now. I'm working to improve as well as researching this group. They were notable on the Kiwi / NZ rock scene and possibly the Australian as well. OK, the problem is that people keep putting up articles and don't bother to put in refs. Never mind. I'll do what I can to improve. Karl Twist (talk) 09:57, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Reply - I know the group isn't made up; I'm concerned as to their notability, which requires more than existence. I'm even more concerned because the international major label releases (which would establish notability for certain) appear to be what is made up.  I've found plenty of references to the first vinyl release in 1979, so I don't feel that's in question, but it's a single, so it's not going to meet WP:NBAND by itself.  Just as an FYI to save time, discogs isn't RS because it's user-generated content, and Havoc's work outside the band doesn't matter to the band, so don't focus on anything about those. MSJapan (talk) 12:42, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Reply - Quite likely the Desire single Desire (Includes the songs "So Divine", "Broken Heart" and 2 others) - WEA HAVOC 1 is an obscure release. I know of recordings that have been released that have no trace on the internet. Not yet anyway! The Gary Havoc & The Hurricanes release, "The way I am", "The letter" / "Rich kid", "Ponsonby" - RTC RTS 71012 is not actually a single. It is actually an extended play. It could be considered a mini-album. Looking at Discogs, yes it relies on user-generated content, but it's still a good and valuable source for info. The validity of info can be gauged by the checking of the profiles and their input over a period of time. There may be other aspects of Gary Havoc which could be, and probably relevant to this article. It wonder if The Mynah Birds would be that notable if Rick James and Neil Young hadn't hit the big time. Karl Twist (talk) 11:05, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * PS: - Further to my post. The Desire album musicians mentioned exist. Mark Huckstep is one of them. Simon Hanna is another. As you can see, Hanna has played on recordings recorded at Mandrill Recording Studios  Karl Twist (talk) 11:19, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Except neither of those entities have articles, and existence is not notability. The problem with adding in material about Gary Havoc himself is that this is not a bio of Gary Havoc, it's a band article, and the band is not going to inherit notability.  Put another way, if Jared Leto had started 30 Seconds to Mars and they never went anywhere as an ensemble, the band would not have an article just because Jared Leto was in it. Part of the problem here is that the band doesn't even have discography on its website, and what's in the article now actually fails WP:V, and thus clearly doesn't meet WP:BAND. MSJapan (talk) 18:46, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
 * The fact that those entities don't have articles is not the issue here. I just put forward the name of Mark Huckstep and Simon Hanna forward to show that the Desire recording is not .... "appear to be what is made up", because those musicians do exist! Just because they don't have articles on Wikipedia makes no difference. They are just given to back up Graham Reid's article on Elsewhere, dated Jul 30, 2014. You also says, "Part of the problem here is that the band doesn't even have discography on its website". Yes that is part of  A  problem. But, I think that this is being rectified. The website is a work in progress from what I can see and I have a feeling the person of interest may be lacking in website building skills. Anyway there is an indication there that there will be updates. Incidentally there is a profile of the band in the Auckland Star but it is not available for online viewing. It's in archive status. Not sure how to get the content. Anyway the band's touring schedule which can be gauged from the adverts in various papers show it had toured around a large part of New Zealand's North Island as well as having performed in Australia. Karl Twist (talk) 11:10, 22 June 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting to allow further development on the article. Nakon 00:25, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Nakon  00:25, 27 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - I don't doubt the authenticity of this band, but they don't seem especially well known in New Zealand. I've been looking for references to beef up the article, but I cannot find anything online that meets with the WP:NBAND requirements. Quite a few articles briefly mention the band's name in passing, but there's nothing substantial written about the band. We really need something like this AudioCulture profile of The Spelling Mistakes. As an alternative to having a stand-alone article on Gary Havoc & The Hurricanes, is there a larger related article that could incorporate this as a section? Something about New Zealand punk history? A record label history? Robyn2000 (talk) 10:32, 30 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Reply - I do believe the article will satisfy most people that it should be stand alone. Time is needed as well as some access to archives that I can't access. Perhaps the coverage today isn't as revealing as some of the more well known NZ artists on Wikipedia but I have seen strong indications that there was good coverage of the group in the late 70s and early 80s. There was a bit about them in the Auckland Star. There were many adds in papers and mags for their playing various venues in NZ. There is more coverage of them in Rip it Up that I can access online as well. Also in some other in Kiwi Rock mag. I also came across a neat little article about them in a paper but sadly I lost my search place. It came up in a search of other similar artists of the time and there it was. I will try and repeat the search which only comes up in image format. They are also included in Discography of New Zealand Popular Music, 1960-1990: Rock, Jazz, Folk, Blues, and Bluegrass list. They also received an IRANZ award for their EP / Mini album. Most of the expansion of the article you see from here to here is due to the work of one person, me! I'm not in NZ and don't have access to libraries and other references that folks in NZ have. As for AudioCulture. It's great and a great place to reference. However, it's only been around 31 May 2013. It's a growing site and I dare say that at some stage Gary Havoc & Co will be on there. As it is now, GH&TH are IMO an important pivotal point in the career of musicians that went on to bigger name bands, and at least one of the musicians from the band may have enough notability to have a page of his own. I'm doing research on this. Sadly I haven't got the time I'd like to have to do more for this article, but I will give it as much attention as my time allows. Karl Twist (talk) 12:54, 1 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak keep. The band definitely existed and is referred to a few times in the seminal "Stranded in Paradise: New Zealand Rock'n'Roll 1955-1988" by John Dix. Some notability in that (according to Dix) their EP was self-financed and successful, the first time that had happened with a New Zealand band, and as such kick-started to boom in self-released records ("Stranded in Paradise", pp. 219, 294). Ex GH&H member Gary Hunt later joined top NZ punk band The Terrorways, as well. The venue, by the way, was Zwines, not Swines. Grutness...wha?  02:14, 2 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Reply Could this instead be turned into a paragraph in the The Terrorways article, then? I would consider them to be a band with greater cultural significance than Gary Havoc & The Hurricanes. Robyn2000 (talk) 07:40, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I could support that. Grutness...wha?  02:19, 13 July 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, &mdash; Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:19, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of People-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Coffee  //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. &mdash; Coffee  //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of New Zealand-related deletion discussions. <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee  //  have a cup  //  beans  // 01:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete Appears to fail NBAND and SIGCOV. Suspected either COI or COPYVIO (or it could just be poorly written). DerbyCountyinNZ  (Talk Contribs) 03:58, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please tell me where the COI is???? I have done most of work on this article from here to here. I picked it up from where it was left off and in a shambles as I have with other articles such as See Patrick Pinney  discussion. Before I started it was here, and after managed to get it to here nothing to do with the band and it doesn't matter if whoever started did! Most of the work has been done by me. Also, where is the COPYVIO ?????? Karl Twist (talk) 09:39, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete as the consensus shows there's still questionability about sourcing and information thus, although the article may seem acceptable, it's best deleted until things can be bolted as confirmed. SwisterTwister   talk  22:47, 12 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Comment - It would be a big mistake to delete to delete this article as this will lessen the chance of helpful information to strengthen the article. This band has an important place in New Zealand history as one of the key bands in the New Zealand late 70s rock scene. Along with The Terrorways, Satellite Spies and other bands on the scene in in NZ at the time, Gary Havoc & The Hurricanes were prominent back then as shown in Rip It Up. This one of the multiple articles that they were featured in, and had a solid amount of coverage. Another thing that needs to be realized is that GH&TH were also an important stepping stone for musicians such as Gary Hunt, and Graeme Scott who had a huge presence and impact on the NZ music scene. When you look at this group in perspective, the importance of then becomes obvious. I knew next to nothing about this group before I came across it in articles for deletion. Something was bugging me about them and I decided to look a little more into it to see if it was worthwhile saving. Not only did I discover it was worthwhile saving as I worked to improve it, I realized that with what limited sources I had to work with that many other influential and important NZ bands are overlooked. Often this is why sourcing info takes time. I now change my Keep for now to a strong keep as I have discovered the importance of this group in the NZ and Auckland City rock scene. You can measure the growth of the article from here before I decided to improve it to here. That's basically just the work of one man to improve it. Just imagine if 5 others found info and added to it. Think what you'd see then!!! Think about it! You would see more and more info. Delete this article and I guarantee you wont! Karl Twist (talk) 10:14, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * You've thrown in a lot of garbage, actually. You've coatracked everything you could find with the band's name in it, and a lot of it is expressly not a reliable source.  It's fine to work on an article, but you've extrapolated a lot of information from concert notices, and that's not appropriate.  You still haven't made a case for anything more than local coverage with all that.  Seeing that someone played a club, and writing a blurb about them playing at the club does not establish notability.  You seem to be under the impression that this band should have an article because they exist, and that disputing the article is in turn disputing the band's existence.  Basically, you have made it very clear that you feel that this band not having an article is Wikipedia saying this band doesn't exist. That's an irrelevant argument; the fundamental point is that existence is not notability, and we still have seen nothing to substantiate anything that would make the group meet the relevant notability guidelines.  What you did say is stuff like "they had a local article with a picture of the group."  So what?  Why is the picture important?  Writing an article about the existence of sources on the band is not an article about the band.  So what you've expanded is a bunch of useless fluff for the most part. The fact that there's a poster with a concert date doesn't mean anything, but you've pretty much loaded all that in there as well.  In short, read the requirements, and then read what you've done, because you've put in a lot of work that's done essentially nothing to address the concerns noted. MSJapan (talk) 17:15, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Reply to the above. Now you are saying I'm throwing in garbage. Look, I'm not going to get into a silly argument with you because it appears that this is the direction in where it could head. Show me where the garbage is please? You were the one that originally nominated this for deletion and you said - " I think all the material in the article is made-up" ..., which is totally incorrect as you and I both know! Yes I admit that I have used concert notices from various websites, but this is to show where the band was playing. I do this for the interest of the readers who either have an interest in the band or have an interest in New Zealand rock music history. You said - "You seem to be under the impression that this band should have an article because they exist". ... That's not only a reckless thing to say. It's also grossly incorrect and by saying that you are being misleading. Possibly unintentionally. The reason why I voted to save this article and did work to improve it is because I believe they have a place in NZ rock history and they are notable. If I didn't think so I wouldn't have bothered with this. Actually, I would have given up halfway though what I have done to date! And replying to your - "What you did say is stuff like "they had a local article with a picture of the group." So what? Why is the picture important?" ... Goodness! I'm just mentioning that the article in the Auckland Star, 25 September 1979, Profile of Auckland new wave band "Gary Havoc and the Hurricanes"., had a picture. Nothing more! How does mentioning the picture become an issue? I thought Wikipedia was about information. Interested people like information. Anyway, I just wrote that how I read it. Nothing more! IMO you seem to be cherry picking certain edits I made to say that this is all I have done to improve the article. Not so! So far I have seen 2 members here saying that the band was a hoax and also using terms like suspected COI or COPYVIO. All untrue! I said it before and I will say it again. I believe this band to be notable and an important part of NZ Rock music history. I'm sorry, but from the get go you were incorrect and the reasons you have given to have the article deleted don't really make sense because you are using your own view without taking info account other factors. Look, if you were to go through the records at Auckland library as well as the Sydney library, I believe you would be quite enlightened. BTW: Havoc working on Xena will be something to look into. I don't think that Havoc is his real name. This would be his stage name. Why don't you help us improve instead of trying to remove? Karl Twist (talk)
 * The fact remains the following: I said "possible" hoax, and you took it to mean "definite" and have been pissed-off about that ever since.  So don't tell me I'm the one misreading. This group does not meet WP:NBAND.  The fact is that every item that was originally in the article that would have proven notability has not been able to have been sourced, and has been removed.  You've got a band with a local career, and you can't source a major label release, a major tour, or anything else.  Instead you have filled out content in the article by using local concert announcements, and those don't meet WP:RS per WP:NMUSIC #1.  The fact that Gary worked on Xena by himself is irrelevant to the band. I stand by my original statements, because COPYVIO is COPYVIO whether it's true or not.  A COI is COI whether the information is true or not.  You are the one in error here, and all your additions are WP:FANCRUFT that don't make a difference to establishing WP:NBAND. MSJapan (talk) 14:32, 14 July 2016 (UTC)
 * Whoaah Dude / Dudette !! Steady on there! I'm not p'd off about anything. LOL why are you even going there? Please do not throw around the term WP:FANCRUFT. That's irresponsible. I hope you won't reach any deeper. Look, please take note. To me this is nothing more than a group who's music I don't really care for. Give me Blood Sweat & Tears, Chicago, Earth Wind & Fire, Sly & The Family Stone, and now were talking! That's real music! The Australasian pub rock genre is something that doesn't even excite me. My approach to this article, and the info on the band contained within is purely from an appreciation of noteworthy info angle. Nothing more.! I'm not the one who started this damned article. I am slightly annoyed at User talk:Andru0711, the creator of this article for not putting in more references which has cost me time and effort. But it has been worth it in a way. This is because I have learnt a bit more about the group and the members who are prominent on the Kiwi rock scene. I have also become aware that many notable Kiwi bands have hard to find referencing and we often need to go to books that have been written about these groups. Not only do we then discover (as I have here) the notability of them but also the  important historical value!. The group is notable and two of the former members in the band could have articles on their own. BTW: There's more than local concert announcements. Much more! They got good coverage in Rip It Up, and more than what I have been able to access on line. Also we need someone to go and check out the article in the Auckland Star, 25 September 1979, Profile of Auckland new wave band "Gary Havoc and the Hurricanes".  I believe the paper had a massive circulation. BTW: Where is the COI and where is the COPYVIO?? Thanks Karl Twist (talk) 02:52, 15 July 2016 (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.