Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Numbered Feathers


 * 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 per WP:G7. — This, that, and the other (talk) 06:47, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Numbered Feathers

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Band is not notable. They are signed to a label that doesn't have its own Wikipedia page. The author also stated that he created the article to "expand their already large Pittsburgh fan base as well as generate awareness elsewhere" at the band's request here. There is no evidence that they meet any of the requirements in WP:BAND Ryan Vesey  Review me!  01:57, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. Intoronto1125 Talk Contributions   01:58, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - I was in the process of filing an AfD on this group as well. A Google search on "Numbered Feathers" "Loose Ends" (their only recording) shows only 14 results, none significant independent coverage. A search on just their name shows similar results. MikeWazowski (talk) 02:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The band is notable within the Pittsburgh area. The fact that their label has no Wikipedia page is irrelevant as the label is a small-time label whilst the band has begun to reach big publicity within the city. The page was written under the guidance of the band as well as the management at the Rex Theater, a popular theater in Pittsburgh that has shown interest in Numbered Feathers.  Due to the guidance of the aforementioned individuals, the page certainly mets the goal to "expand their already large Pittsburgh fan base as well as generate awareness elsewhere". And the page does meet the criteria cited by WP: BAND which is met in "7. Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city; note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability." The band is incredibly prominent in the Pittsburgh indie rock scene and thus meet this criteria.  The inclusion will not do harm to the already vast array of information on Wikipedia, it will simply help add to the information already provided. And as for the claim that a search of the band yields minimal results, that is do to a narrow search.  A search of "Numbered Feathers" yields 1,430,000 results and several sites with coverage of the band. I believe the page is helpful inclusion into the indie rock pages of Wikipedia and I am willing to make edits in order to ensure it stays on the site. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TOMER2500 (talk • contribs) 02:11, 14 December 2011 (UTC)  — TOMER2500 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * You must have searched for Numbered feathers without quotation marks which yields results like this one which has nothing to do with the band. A search for "numbered feathers" only yields 535 results. Most of them are for facebook or myspace. Ryan Vesey  Review me!  02:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Well just because most of the results yield Facebook or myspace results does not harm the credibility of the band. Especially because two of the more prominent results for the band are their ReverbNation page and a YouTube documentary on the band (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ftXbQgbeMAo). Most of the critical reception, admittedly, has not been online but rather through written publications in the city of Pittsburgh.  Written publications are just as valid as online resources.  And I have added references to showcase their concert series at a local theater as well as their album announcement and things of that nature. I still believe this band is popular enough to be deserving of their page.  I do not see why this page is considered unacceptable as it does nothing beyond expand the wealth of information regarding music on Wikipedia. I believe this page deserves its place on Wikipedia. And as I stated before, I am willing to make edits in order to ensure the page its place on Wikipedia.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by TOMER2500 (talk • contribs) 02:23, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * The page was written under the guidance of the band as well as the management at the Rex Theater WP:COI
 * The inclusion will not do harm to the already vast array of information on Wikipedia WP:NOHARM
 * You are not exactly helping your case here. And no, Facebook and Myspace does not hurt their credibility but it doesn't add to it. We do not use Facebook, Myspace or Youtube as proof of notability because they are WP:SPS. As for written publications, you need proof for that (e.g. Local newspapers, magazines, etc). Please provide it. Zlqchn (talk) 02:38, 14 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. --Legis (talk - contribs) 02:49, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I see no reason for you to get rude with me (i.e. You are not exactly helping your case here). I am simply trying to state my reasoning for why I believe this page should remain. And while I understand Facebook and Myspace are not exemplary citations, the group's ReverbNation page is certainly a good source. It is a hub in which the band may post music, book shows, and interact with fans.  And as for the written publications, I shall post those citations immediately. --TOMER2500 (talk) 02:54, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: ReverbNation isn't much more reliable than Facebook or MySpace to establish notability. You've said it yourself, the band may post music there. To establish notability, the kind of references you must provide are third-party reliable sources, that is, the kind of references that have an established reputation for fact-checking ("reliable") and are not connected with the band in any way ("third-party"). In short, you must provide evidence of coverage in sources where the band would have to involve their attorney in the process if they want anything changed. --  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 03:02, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I was unable to find the kind of sources I've talked about in the above comment. --  Blanchardb -Me•MyEars•MyMouth- timed 03:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I have acknowledged that Facebook and MySpace were not excellent sources. ReverbNation is mediocre as a source. However, the recent inclusion of two Pittsburgh literary publications shall boost the credibility of the page I believe. This page is informative, it is not ridden with errors or slander, and it follows the guidelines set by Wikipedia for the inclusion of an article.  For these reasons, I believe the article has a place on Wikipedia. And as stated before, I am open to suggestions for edits in order to keep the page on this website and I am also adding more local sources to the page. --TOMER2500 (talk) 03:16, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. This article is informative, it is well written, it is unbiased, it is devoid or slander, contains newly updated credible sources, and follows the guidelines set by Wikipedia. --TOMER2500 (talk) 03:31, 14 December 2011 (UTC) — TOMER2500 (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * delete fails WP:BAND - no proof that it "Has become one of the most prominent representatives of a notable style or the most prominent of the local scene of a city" which is the claimed rationale. Gaijin42 (talk) 03:57, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. This band does not appear to have achieved sufficient notability pursuant to WP:MUSIC yet. Most of the sources provided are self-published (such as Facebook and YouTube) or irrelevant (such as a link to the Rex Theatre web site where the band is not mentioned anywhere I can see). The ReverbNation site is not an independent source to the extent that it is a site which allows bands to promote themselves, and on the other hand it tends to suggest less-than-major notability, by showing that the band is ranked number 100 among alternative bands in Pittsburgh. Of the two print sources cited, one, Pittsburgh City Paper, gives no indication on its web site that it has reviewed this band's EP last month, and the other, The Devil's Advocate, appears to be a high school newspaper from the high school which this band's members attended. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:04, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  Logan Talk Contributions 05:22, 14 December 2011 (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.