Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/RIA: The self proclaimed greatest air band in the world

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was delete. ugen 64 00:58, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

RIA / RIAfunk
Non notable. What the hell is an "air guitar band" anyway? sjorford &rarr;&bull;&larr; 18:39, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment. I don't know whether this band (or the 'genre') is notable or not, but I do recall that Los Angeles hosted the First National Air Guitar Championship (or something similar) in November 2002. They really did jump around on stage pretending to play a guitar in sync to the rock that was being played. I don't know if it was ever followed by a Second National..., and I don't know how notable this is. -- Brhaspati (talkcontribs) 19:18, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)
 * Comment. I see that our own article on Air guitar mentions organized contests in Finland, Australia and the US. So yes, the genre is apparently notable. I cannot however comment on the band's notability. -- Brhaspati (talkcontribs) 19:23, 2005 Mar 5 (UTC)
 * Delete. I suppose there can be such a thing as a notable air band, but I don't see evidence that this one is. The only relevent hits I found for RIA + "air band" are the groups own homepages. The only link to the article is from theRIA, added by the creator of the article. Non notable, likely vanity. -- Infrogmation 19:40, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, I found no evidence of notability. - Jeltz talk  21:03, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable, band vanity. Megan1967 01:55, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Note: How is this band vanity? I see no attempt at self promotion. The information is clearly presented in a factual manner, and by visiting their website you will see that they do not even make a profit from their work. There are no ads or gimmicks, anything they have created is available for free download. --Koopatroopa64 08:49, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. I have edited this entry in order to hopefully address these issues, though I was not the one who originally created it. It seems as if the impression was made that "RIA" was a well-known, serious air band. However, they are more of an underground group and are more a creative group in general than an actual air band.--Koopatroopa64 09:00, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Note: An edit to the article in question and this vote are so far the only edits by this user. -- Infrogmation
 * Response: Rather than accuse everyone who votes to keep this article of being the same person, being such a significant Wikipedia contributor as your user information states, why don't you acknowledge common courtesy and offer some suggestions on how this article can be improved upon? No one has stated that they refuse to edit the article in order to improve upon it. Just because YOU have not heard of this group, although it has already been repeatedly, CLEARLY stated that this is a relatively SMALL group, does not mean that they do not merit themselves an entry. --Koopatroopa64 08:58, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. The band documents most of its exploits on its own website, but the work of the individual members can be found in various mediums. The band members have never taken themselves too seriously and the article was not an example of "band vanity." The person who made the original article wasn't even a member of the band, but a fan. If someone liked the band enough to write the article, whether or not they're as well known as someone like Brittany Spears, then the article should stay up. --GroggyFroggyPoet 18:42, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Note: Above is user's first/so far only edit. -- Infrogmation 20:22, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. The band may not play instruments but that doesn't mean they don't deserve an article. They work hard and have plenty of fans. Who are you to judge?--CrusaderOfZrage 18:54, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Note: Above is user's first/so far only edit. -- Infrogmation
 * Response: Obviously enough people are familiar with this group to step forward and create an account to defend it. Accusing them of being the same person in order to make your own votes for deletion seem more substantiated is disrespectful. You are a frequent Wikipedia user, why do you not offer some suggestions on what can be done to improve the article? I am sure that either I or another user will step forward to edit it. --Koopatroopa64 09:15, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. All I'm gonna say is if you're concerned about a joke article, this isn't one. If you're concerned about incorrect facts, there aren't any in the article. They may not be well-known, but they've more than earned a wikipedia article. This is legitimate, so why take it down? --I Love Ponies 19:00, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Note: Above vote is thus far user's only contribution to Wikipedia. -- Infrogmation 20:22, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, vanity. --Carnildo 22:10, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, vanity, unverifiable. -- Jmabel | Talk 23:40, Mar 8, 2005 (UTC)
 * Note: Please explain what exactly is unverifiable about this entry. It is already stated that they are a small group and thus not much information is available on the internet regarding them, aside from their homepage. Everything stated about the band is factual, and can be verified through five years of entries on their website. --Koopatroopa64 08:43, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep.I for one have been to an air guitar contest, and have taken part in one. Although, my voice may not be heard above all others, I can tell you that nothing in this article has been falsified, and it does keep with the wiki's spirit of neutrality. The article states that RIA says that theyy are the greatest air band in the world. Do they? Yes the do, it is a fact. The genre is real, this is a fact. I do not see the problem that has arised, this isn't another Solog, where it is BLATENTLY one-sided. ---GearType2
 * The above was posted by User:69.232.210.78 --Carnildo 05:50, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not notable, sock puppet supported. DaveTheRed 07:47, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * What Dave said. Unravel all sockpuppets!  Wave bye-bye!  Just to make it official:  Delete. - Lucky 6.9 08:05, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * What sockpuppets? Stop throwing up red herrings, if you would take a look at the article you would see there is nothing wrong with it. My vote still stands as keep.---GearType2
 * Ooh, hosiery with an attitude! I promise to stop "throwing up red herrings" if you promise to just stop throwing up.  Deal? - Lucky 6.9 17:16, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Isn't there a section on the wikipedia page about "not biting newcomers?" I didn't know what a sock puppet was, I had to look it up. GearType2 just didn't know what it was and didn't realize it was a real term. And as for Koopatroopa64's comment about multiple people signing up cause they felt strongly about the entry cause they support the band, I'll be the first to admit that's the whole reason I made an account. Tell me how to prove it and I will. I gotta tell you, this whole hostility thing between the people who say delete and the people who say keep is putting a bad taste in my mouth about wikipedia. I mean, I appreciate the fact that anyone can edit the entries and that you try to keep it legitimate, but there's no need to attack the people who are defending the article. We want the article to stay up and we're willing to fix it so that it can, we just need to know specific stuff to work on. And Lucky 6.9, I'm sorry if it seems like I'm attacking you because I'm not, I just had to pick one place to post this. This is directed at everyone on both sides of the discussion. I'm also sorry this post is so long. We're just fans who want to see this work out for everyone. Ok,I forgot to sign and add a time stamp so if anyone noticed that, I'm doing it now.--I Love Ponies 02:41, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Band vanity. Delete. Ban sockpuppets. --Slowking Man 08:20, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
 * If you wish to keep the information available online, may I suggest either Wikinerds or Everything2? Wikinerds accepts anything and everything.  Since it's only a fraction of the size of Wikipedia, your message is more likely to get seen.  The info stays, it's more visible...everybody wins.  BTW, I did not bite a newcomer.  I responded in kind to an attack by a perceived sockpuppet. - Lucky 6.9 04:18, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the suggestion about the other site, but it seems to me that the author would rather keep his/her article here if possible. I mean, that's probably why people are trying so hard to find out what to do to keep it up: we feel strongly about it and it means a lot to us to keep it here. Personally, if I wrote an article I'd rather have it on wikipedia - its more...I don't know, prestigious maybe? Not quite the word I want, but it'll work. Point is, if we can't save the article I suppose moving it'll do, but we all want it here. Why have a cheeseburger when you can eat steak? --I Love Ponies 06:32, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * To keep an article, show how it is important or notable, for example by pointing to web or print sources discussing the topic. Get other established Wikipedians to support keeping the article and improving it. Write according to the Manual of Style. Hope this helps! For specifics relating to bands, see WikiProject Music/Notability and Music Guidelines. Cheers, -- Infrogmation 06:58, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the information. Considering they have not pursued music seriously career-wise, and the two CDs they released were not under any label, how should this be addressed in the article? Should it be moved to another category? Also, I found another external link for them- they attended a few Dance Dance Revolution tournaments in Florida from 2001-2002, the site I found lists them as a team in Florida and links to their site. Should this be noted in the article as well? --Koopatroopa64 18:26, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.