Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ILuminate


 * 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. The Blade of the Northern Lights ( 話して下さい ) 16:42, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

ILuminate

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:BASIC as article does not provide further information to support notability beyond covering a television appearance and the nature of their performance. Originally denoted the article for PROD under reason per WP:BIO, which was wrong; issue was not under that. An editor ended that PROD on grounds of adding more citations, but this does not deal with the real issue I now have had to highlight correctly in this AfD. GUtt01 (talk) 12:09, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Dance-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:43, 31 July 2021 (UTC)


 * Keep. The subject has received coverage since the television appearance as recently as earlier this year, and was the subject of an article in The New York Times in 2014. Thus, it has received WP:SUSTAINED coverage. As for WP:BASIC, that policy discusses people whereas this article is about a company and their performances. There are enough sources here to pass WP:GNG. NemesisAT (talk) 17:52, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment: Having the sources to pass WP:GNG is not the issue. It is WP:BASIC that is at fault here: even with the sources provided, the amount of coverage is trivial and leads to notability being questionable as a result. GUtt01 (talk) 18:04, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * This is not a biographical article so I don't think WP:BASIC applies. Your above comment reads like you agree with me that it passes GNG, am I interpreting it correctly? NemesisAT (talk) 18:13, 31 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I would only really agree on notability, if the article provided more content exactly. The only thing it was covering was just the company's part in a television programme and the director of the company, in brief lines. Even for a stub, that notability issue was a serious problem, and it was quite practically something that should have been sorted out. It was hard to understand how anyone hadn't, hence the AfD - if no-one had further added to the article to justify its notability since its creation several years ago, then either they didn't think to bother or couldn't provide more information because there were no verifiable/reliable sources to back it up.GUtt01 (talk) 18:22, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 12:06, 7 August 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete The criteria for establishing notability for companies/organizations as per WP:NCORP] is for multiple sources (at least two) of deep or significant coverage with in-depth information *on the company* and (this bit is important!) containing "Independent Content". "Independent content", in order to count towards establishing notability, must include original and independent opinion, analysis, investigation, and fact checking that are clearly attributable to a source unaffiliated to the subject. None of the references in the article meet the criteria and having searched I am unable to locate any references that meet the criteria. Topic fails WP:NCORP.  HighKing++ 19:34, 13 August 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 01:44, 16 August 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Numerically this is tilting towards deletion, but some sources have been provided, and the "delete" !voters have not explicitly engaged with them. Analysis of these sources would be useful.
 * Weak keep Firstly, as a company, iLuminate should be evaluated under WP:NCORP (which has higher standards than WP:GNG). That said, I think that reviews of their show from reliable independent sources fit the WP:CORPDEPTH requirement. The NYT article has been linked, but I've also found more in depth coverage in the Las Vegas Review Journal and Knox News. These are more local/regional sources but they still essentially meet WP:PRODUCTREV. I'd like to see coverage on a wider scale but I think these are enough to pass WP:NCORP for now. Qwaiiplayer (talk) 12:36, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, no analysis in secondary sources.  Abductive  (reasoning) 06:33, 29 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete, as per HighKing. MrsSnoozyTurtle 10:54, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - as per others, article fails WP:NCORP.-- Melaleuca alternifolia  |  talk  20:30, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde (Talk) 13:12, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment The Las Vegas Review Journal is partly interview but I feel it easily has enough non-interview content to count towards establishing notability. The Knox News source is weaker as much of it is quotes, however it does contain background information too. The New York Times article is a review and appears to be fully independent of the subject. NYT is a major, trustworthy publication and thus I feel this article helps establish notability. Finally, to demonstrate that the subject has WP:SUSTAINED coverage, I've found an article from Las Vegas Weekly from two days ago. I feel the wide range of sourcing establishes notability. NemesisAT (talk) 22:23, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Keep. This a dance company, not a business corporation, and as such WP:NCORP is not our standard because its a performing arts group which falls under WP:CREATIVE. There's enough RS here presented by NemesisAT and Qwaiiplayer to satisfy criteria 3 of that guideline.4meter4 (talk) 16:22, 10 September 2021 (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.