Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noteworthy (a cappella group)


 * 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 -- Samir धर्म 05:22, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Noteworthy (a cappella group)
Non-notable college a cappella group. Only claims to notability (other than their name) are competing in (but not winning) the ICCA and the dubious and unreferenced claim that they are the only group that performs original material. savidan(talk) (e@) 05:40, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

(The claim, more accurately, is that they perform only original material, i.e. they write everything they perform. This is very different claim from the one you state, Savidan. Please read the article carefully before trying to make a decision, guys.)


 * Merge to List of collegiate a cappella groups. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch \ talk 10:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete (Merge is really a Keep since it allows the author to recreate). Fails WP:MUSIC. BlueValour 02:52, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete long and reasonably well-written article, but nn regardless Paul 20:14, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Armon 16:37, 8 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Abstaining since as an alumnus I am quite biased, but at least verifying the claim of being the only collegiate group performing all-original a cappella music. See below. (Not a registered Wikipedia user) 19:18, 8 September 2006 UTC

The people responding are experts who would know the state of the a cappella world. They are the president of the Contempory A Cappella Society of America, the founder of Mainely A Cappella, and the executive director of the ICCA competition respectively:

Date: Fri, 8 Sep 2006 11:16:04 -0700 From: Deke Sharon  To: Don Gooding  Cc: Amanda Grish , Michael Barrientos  Subject: Re: Any college a cappella groups that perform all-original music?

Mike,

Other than Stanford Fleet Street's recent album of all original music (which I think was a one-time project, not a permanent direction), I know of nothing in your all-original league. I think you're safe calling yourselves the first and only all-original collegiate a cappella group. Congrats!

On Sep 8, 2006, at 6:08 AM, Don Gooding wrote:

> Hi Mike- > > I concur with Amanda - I don't know of any others. But Deke would > indeed be the guy who'd know, as he's the biggest promoter of contemporary > a cappella groups doing originals. > > At 12:24 AM 9/8/2006, Amanda Grish wrote: > > Hi Mike, > > > > There are none that I know of personally. Have you talked to Don Gooding or > > Deke Sharon? They would be your best resource. Don Gooding is "friends" with > > many a cappella groups on My Space, so he might have a more recent idea. > > Don? > > > > Good luck Mike. Hope we'll be hearing from Noteworthy this year! > > > > Amanda > > > > On 9/7/06 6:21 PM, "Michael Barrientos"  wrote: > > > > > I'm an alumnus of the UC Berkeley a cappella group Noteworthy. > > > . The group is trying to > > > check if the claim is true that they are currently the only a college a > > > cappella group that performs only original music without any covers. I > > > figured BOCA would have the best chance of knowing of any other college > > > groups that exist that do not perform covers of songs. > > > > > > To the best of your knowledge, is there any other collegiate group that > > > you have run into that is performing only their own original music, past > > > or present? If you cannot answer this question, do you know of other > > > resources who would know if this is true or not? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > -- > > > Mike Barrientos - mbarrien@cal.berkeley.edu > > > > > > > ___________________________ > > Amanda Grish > > Varsity Vocals > > ICCA Executive Director > > ICHSA Executive Director

I might also argue in this case that Noteworthy may satisfy the following guidelines of WP:MUSIC:
 * 1) Has composed a number of melodies, tunes or standards used in a notable genre, or tradition or school within a notable genre. (To date, Noteworthy has written and performed 32 original songs. Whether a cappella counts as a notable genre is up for someone to argue.)
 * 2) Has won or placed in a major music competition. (Noteworthy came in 3rd in their competition, and not every group even makes it into the ICCA competition. Whether the ICCA quarter finals qualify as a major music competition is up for someone to argue.)

Thank you for going out of your way to attempt to verify the "all-original" claim. However, private email correspondences do not meet the verifiability standards of Wikipedia. As for the composing songs, that criteria is in the "other" category, i.e. not a criteria for a musical group persay.

The claim about about reaching the "ICCA quarter finals" is not contained in the article (or sourced online as far as I can tell). I would argue that this does not meet that requirement anyway, as the ICCA contains many, many categories of awards, and 8 different groups would reach quarterfinals in each. I don't think that is sufficient. savidan(talk) (e@) 00:57, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

What falls under the "other" category? Some may argue that a cappella falls "outside of mass media traditions".

If a local newspaper or school newspaper were to make a mention of the all-original claim (I'd have to research, but I'm sure any article on Noteworthy would have mentioned this), would that qualify for verifiability? Once sourced properly, would the only all-original collegiate group be enough to make the group "Noteworthy" enough? (pun fully intended)

As for sourcing the quarter finals thing (which I'll put in the main article if it's kept): http://www.varsityvocals.com/icca/results.shtml - 2006 quarter finals results, West Region, University of Oregon If quarter finals aren't enough.... I guess they'll just have to make it further in this year's ICCAs. :-) (The same guy as before) 12.191.193.147 01:26, 9 September 2006 (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.