Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nivram


 * 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. Beeblebrox (talk) 17:53, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Nivram

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Declined prod. My original reasoning for prod was "Article about an unnotable tribute band, searches fail to turn up the significant coverage required. Only reference given is that of their agents.". This was inaccurate though, the reference isn't for their agents - its for that of the Bootleg Beatles, and doesnt mention them. Reason given for declining prod was "clearly notable as one of the first tribute bands..." but i see no evidence for this so bringing here for your consideration. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 22:35, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Prior to this article being brought here to AfD, I've added a reference for the album having charted in Argentina, although I can't find a ref online. A book reference will suffice though, and thus the band satisfy criterion #2 at Notability (music). The evidence for them being one of the first tribute bands is a simple deduction from the dates. There is no attempt to make the reference you mentioned say something it doesn't - the ref states that the Bootleg Beatles claim to be the world's first tribute band, formed in 1980. Nivram were formed the same year, making the fact pretty clear. Again, I only have a written reference for this, from the album sleeve, but it is nonetheless adequate in my opinion. Online mention of the band is admittedly scant, but this is due to their activity being solely in Spain and Latin America, and before the rise of the internet. It does not necessarily mean they are not notable. Bretonbanquet (talk) 22:49, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The place to find it would be here, according to the wikipedia sourcing guide, which I'd try myself if I spoke the lingo. As for the mathematics, thats not the case, as it doesn't allow for any other bands which may have formed in between. Sleeve liner notes are primary sources and not reliable sources. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 23:04, 10 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I tried there, but it does not show charts from that far back. Regarding the mathematics, we are talking about the time period between the end of March 1980 and July 1980 - not a huge amount of room for a large number of tribute bands to be formed. In any case, they were almost certainly the first tribute band formed in Spain, and I am trying to source that. An album sleeve may not be a reliable source with regard to a contentious issue, but we are only talking about the date a band was formed. The guideline I found states that "Primary sources, on the other hand, are often difficult to use appropriately. While they can be reliable in many situations, they must be used with caution..." not that they cannot be used. This kind of primary source requires a secondary source to avoid WP:OR, which is the role played by the Gordon Poole Agency source. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:23, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 20:28, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:46, 11 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete, there does not appear to be any significant coverage by independent reliable sources as required by the general notability guideline. Any additional claim of notability must be backed up by reliable sources, extrapolating a claim from a date and other information is original research. As it is, the Wikipedia article on Tribute Bands suggests that there were some around in the 60's and 70's. Additionally even if it true the fact that no reliable sources discuss it seems to indicate that being one of the first tribute bands is not a particularly notable historic achievement. I can find no information on whether they charted or any information on the publication cited in the article, notability requires "verifiable objective evidence". Guest9999 (talk) 21:31, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment The fact that neither Nivram's chart activity, nor the long-out-of-print Argentine book I have which outlines it, are mentioned on the internet, opens up the problem that often plagues more obscure subjects. The written word is still bigger than the internet in the respect that there is a wealth of information available in books that the internet has not found. The music notability criteria which states that notability is bestowed upon acts which have charted in any country is badly hamstrung by the expectation that 50-60 years of chart history in every country in the world will be somewhere on the internet. It isn't. Sometimes obscure books will be required and it's a shame if that's not acceptable. Bretonbanquet (talk) 23:18, 18 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that paper sources - sometimes obscure ones - can be essential when building the encyclopaedia. In this case however as I can find absolutely no information about the book there is no way to evaluate if it is a reliable source. Can you provide any more information, publisher, notes, ISBN, etc.? I would also note that what is stated in Notability (music) is that "A musician or ensemble... may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria" (emphasis added) - this implies that there are instances where bands that have charted may not be notable. Cases like this where there is an almost complete dearth of coverage may fall into that category. Guest9999 (talk) 00:37, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * The book publisher is Grupo Editorial San Rafael, but I can't find anything about them online - they may well have been relatively insignificant and/or defunct. No ISBN number, which I had realised isn't very helpful. Many smaller South American publishers (not so usually Argentine but often Paraguayan, Uruguyan, Chilean etc) were very slow in adopting the ISBN. The author appears to have been a local radio DJ. Point taken about the wording of the notability criteria. Bretonbanquet (talk) 01:57, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- Cirt (talk) 21:39, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. While I am sympathetic to the problems of sourcing, the real difficulty here is that the subject isn't notable and the strongest claims are not sourced at all ("one of the earliest tribute bands").  The Uninvited Co., Inc. 21:08, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.

Comment - The sourcing is a problem, but this appears mainly to be an issue of obscure sourcing rather than no sourcing at all. I accept that the book source is obscure, but it exists nonetheless. I disagree that the subject isn't notable, in fact I am certain of notability, both in terms of the "earliest tribute band" status and the chart activity - the problem is the nature of the sources. I think it is fairly clear that they were a very early tribute band, and to say that's WP:OR is a little picky in my opinion. Wikipedia (or any other source) can only throw up two older bands, The Buggs and The Bootleg Beatles, the latter only being months older. I would add that that The Buggs article is even less well-sourced than Nivram and they did not chart anywhere to my knowledge. It is claimed on the list at Tribute band that they were "one of the earliest tribute bands", with no cite. This may suggest that this stuff is just not well-sourced, and this does not mean it is not notable material. Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:57, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't know how we could expect to find a definite answer as to what the first tribute band ever was. I note that this 1979 New York magazine item, which predates the establishment of the Bootleg Beatles, refers to a Fats Waller tribute band. The source cited in this article saying that the Bootleg Beatles were the first tribute band doesn't specifically make that claim. Another one of the sources used in this article calls Nivram "totally obscure", and a third source is the liner notes to the band's own album. So if this article is to survive, it would seem that the justification for it to do so would be either (a) extensive coverage in reliable independent sources, which I don't see here; or (b) confirmation that Nivram's album actually did hit the record charts somewhere. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 16:32, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Firstly, a clarification of the claim in that article that the Bootleg Beatles were the first tribute band - towards the end of the third paragraph, the world's first tribute band were ready for a fresh challenge. This is a reproduction of the text on their own website (which would probably make a better source) here . With regard to determining the first tribute band, I agree that it could be difficult, particularly given that sources seem hard to come by. But this surely does not mean that it's not a notable feat. The other problem is that the term "tribute band" could also be used to describe a band of musicians brought together simply to pay tribute to another artist, as, I suspect, in the Fats Waller case, without their actually being what we think of today as a tribute band, i.e. a band that tours and performs solely as a clone act of the original subject. I am still looking for further sources, and I may have to wait till my next trip to Spain to find them - if this article is deleted in the meantime, I can always bring it back with new sources. I'm a bit frustrated that the book source that I did find, that verified the chart entry, is rather obscure in itself, and there's no trace of the book on the net. I do understand how that makes life difficult. Bretonbanquet (talk) 18:57, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * I stand corrected, having missed the reference in the third paragraph quoted by Bretonbanquet. However, I hope we can agree that the Bootleg Beatles' web site referring to themselves as the "world's first tribute band", and their agent quoting that description on the agency's web site, do not constitute reliable, independent sources that the Bootleg Beatles really were the first tribute band. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 20:55, 23 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, definitely agreed, but there are other, more acceptable sources such as these, which say the same thing. Bretonbanquet (talk) 21:19, 23 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete No verifiable claim to notability, no secondary source coverage. The single offhand mention in the Scotland Herald may well be based on Wikipedia research. Gigs (talk) 14:40, 29 March 2010 (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.