Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jurisdiction near you


 * 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  d elete. - Mailer Diablo 03:44, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Jurisdiction near you

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

A non-notable band made up of University of Michigan law students that fails WP:MUSIC. The only citation is to a University of Michigan website. It has one self-produced single and only rumors of an upcoming album. The article was prodded, but an anonymous editor deleted the prod and edited the page to describe the band as a "too-cool-for-Wikipedia-to-believe rock combo" and noted a forthcoming YouTube video. I do not see this as being a sufficient assertion of notability. FreeKresge 04:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * WP:MUSIC is a guideline, not a bright-line test. Failing to meet a subjective standard of notability is not grounds for immediate deletion, and WP:MUSIC's notability standard can be fulfilled by publication in student newspapers, given sufficient other content in the link.  The anonymous author edit has been deleted- although it is noteworthy to mention that the anonymous author DID edit more substantively than this Article intially asserted, adding a reference to an outside source (a student newspaper).  That reference has been incorporated into the body of the article.  I believe this article is sufficiently noteworthy as to avoid deletion.  Full disclosure:  I am not the author of this article, but I am a member of the band.  Parliamentofravens 04:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Further, it should be noted that Wikipedia at large has given pretty wide berth to student bands, allowing this stub Springhill(band) to persist unedited since August 2nd, 2006, despite its dearth of information and citations. Parliamentofravens 04:41, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Can it be shown, through the use of information taken from externally verifiable, third-party sources, where this band is the subject of said cited source, showing that the subject passes the key policies of verifiability and no original research, and the guideline on use of reliable sources? Does this cited information show that the band passes the notability inclusion guideline for musically related subjects, a long-standing guideline for inclusion used by contributors to the site? I believe that if you can dig up multiple sources independant of the band that can be used to substantiate the claims made in the article, then it will stand a better chance of inclusion. -- saberwyn 05:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * As to the "wide berth" given to the other article you indicated, Springhill (band), please note that there are over one and one half million articles on Wikipedia. Not everything can be checked at once, and unfortunately some articles can languish for months or years without the appropriate attention. Also, articles should be improved per the policies and guidelines if possible, or if not, deleted. -- saberwyn 05:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Use of student newspapers to establish notability has been disputed in the past. See Wikipedia talk:Notability/Archive 7. (My opinion is that students being written about by their classmates doesn't demonstrate notability). cab 07:10, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Per previous: It should also be noted that in non-campusnewspapers in towns of similar size to a university community, or even in large cities, that articles about groups in the town may be influenced by friendships between members of the group and the reporter or publisher, and that a campus paper with an independent editorial board can in fact be as reliable a source as a paper in the town, so there is no policy that they are automatically excluded. Each source should be judged on its own merits. Edison 16:47, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment the newspaper in question is not the Michigan Daily, the main student newspaper. It is the Res Gestae, a law school specific newspaper.  It is the University of Michigan web site that I noted above, so I did acknowledge it.--FreeKresge 20:24, 14 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete This band has not yet even done a recording, the article appears to be OR, and is POV. Fundamental Dan 20:35, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, despite the creative legalistic debate above - simply doesn't meet the guidelines for band notability.- Dmz5 *Edits**Talk* 21:51, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete this article has failed to state a claim upon which notability can be granted.-- danntm T C 02:49, 15 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per notability, OR and POV issues. Also note for irony value that the stub cited as precedent for keeping an article of this type is now a red link. ShaleZero 16:41, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
 * My fault. I nominated it for PROD deletion as there was no externally verified information in the article. It was upgraded to Speedy A7 during this time. -- saberwyn 10:16, 18 February 2007 (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.