Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lafayette Chorduroys


 * 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 delete. Proto :: ►  11:13, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Lafayette Chorduroys

 * — (View AfD)

Fails WP:MUSIC. ghits:. NMChico24 05:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC) I'm telling you people I, and others, will do what it takes to make this page as unbiased as can be. Please let me know what part of this page shows a conflict of interest. Also, the competition is considered the biggest of its kind for this type of music, so placing 2nd out of 22 (not even looking at past results) is a huge deal to people in this field of music. Also, this page is NO different than any other collegiate a cappella's wikipedia page. I do not see what the difference is between those groups and this one.
 * Delete Fails WP:MUSIC. —ShadowHalo 05:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment What criteria does it not meet? How can I fix it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yankeesmarc923 (talk • contribs)
 * Please read WP:MUSIC. The guidelines there should answer all your questions.  Thanks --NMChico24 05:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * We do meet this criteria. We have won or placed in a major music competition. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yankeesmarc923 (talk • contribs)
 * You may also wish to review WP:COI as this appears to apply as well. --NMChico24 05:22, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - fails WP:MUSIC. Thanks for fessing up to your conflict of interest.MER-C 05:11, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * I see no conflict of interest as everything that is stated on the page as a statement is backed up with links to outside websites. I have also just removed all objectivitiy or biasness that the page had. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Yankeesmarc923 (talk • contribs)
 * A conflict of interest means that the author of the article is related to the subject of the article. In these cases, it is extremely difficult for the author to write objective content in the same way it is extremely difficult to write an objective autobiography.  --Sigma 7 00:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - doesn't appear to pass WP:MUSIC. Jayden54 14:54, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Per nom and WP:COI --Sigma 7 00:46, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Coming in second place out of 22 competitors does not qualify as a "major music competition". Lyrl Talk C 01:35, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * The ICCA is certainly a legitimate competition. Having participated in six ICCA events, I can say they consist of the best collegiate a cappella. It is also not restricted to 22 groups. Last year over 100 groups participated in the semi-final round, with even more applying to reach this level of competition. Listen to the Best of College A Cappella CD compiled from the winning groups every year. 11:53, 3 January 2007 —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.142.237.77 (talk) 04:55, 4 January 2007 (UTC).
 * Weak keep, placing in an international collegiate competition does seem marginally notable. The conflict of interest is a problem, but is not a reason for deletion.  The authors should be chastised for their self-promotion, and forced to learn to recite WP:AUTO in four-part harmony, and should be strongly discouraged from making further edits to their own article (except, perhaps, for monitoring it for vandalism), but I see no actual reason for deletion.  If this is kept, I'll put it on my list for cleanup/pruning.  Xtifr tälk 02:09, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * With reference to other pages, Inclusion is not an indicator of notability
 * As far as the "major competition" criteria, the ICCA does seem to be major, but the Chorduroys do not appear to have placed in the usual sense, as in the overall final competition. They placed in the quarterfinal, which I'm not convinced is sufficient to meet WP:MUSIC.
 * The "conflict of interest" refers not to specific content in the article, but to the fact that there is an inherent conflict of interest in members of a group editing the article about that group. While such activity is suspicious and often warrants scrutiny and criticism, it is not in and of itself criteria for deletion. Lyrl Talk C 16:39, 4 January 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete no eveidence of notability offered. Nuttah68 12:39, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete although they did compete in the ICAA, I would think that making it to the finals would be the bar - i.e. competing at the highest level in sports, they didn't make it to the semi-finals.  SkierRMH, 00:10, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Second place in a regional quarter-final? Subject does not appear to pass any of the criteria listed in WP:MUSIC. Ohconfucius 03:57, 8 January 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.