Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rhythm Method (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   merge to Binghamton University. Shimeru (talk) 05:55, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Rhythm Method (a cappella group)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Non-notable a cappella group. Fiftytwo thirty (talk) 21:54, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions.  —• Gene93k (talk) 22:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 22:57, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge into Section 9 of Binghamton University. Doc Quintana (talk) 22:58, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge although I could be pursuaded to keep if independent sources can be produced to show why this group is notable? A few finishes in a few events does not make the group notable ala Straight No Chaser (a cappella group).--- Balloonman  NO! I'm Spartacus! 23:05, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge merge as suggested by Doc Quintana. The article looks like a repeat of a university brochure and it's not quite encyclopedic. D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 01:23, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep under the conditions that it seems unreasonable that this article should be deleted while articles for other equally and less apparently successful/notable groups seem to exist (see other groups on the wikipedia list of collegeiate a cappella groups- The Dreamers of Phi Mu Alpha, Emocapella, Magevet. Why this article in particular? Iitywimwybmad (talk) 23:29, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: That is not a valid argument, as articles are judged on individual merit, and a capella groups must currently be judged under Wikipedia notability guidelines per WP:MUSIC. You could always nominate the other groups' articles for deletion, if you feel they fail notability guidelines, although Emocapella seem to have some claim to notability in terms of press coverage. Moswento (talk) 07:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: Hasn't this group fulfilled section nine of the notability guidelines by its success at competitions? Balloonman says, above, that "a few finishes in a few events does not make the group notable," but that seems to directly contradict section nine of the notability guidelines (shown here WP:MUSIC) which states that notability can be established if the group "Has won or placed in a major music competition." Iitywimwybmad (talk) 12:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * And number eight reads, Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award. The examples of a major music award are Grammy, Juno, Mercury Choice, or Grammis---which one of those were RM nominated for?  Beyond the obvious, you have to start weighing the notability of the event and factoring that into the equation.  While being a runner up for a Grammy would be enough, being the runner up in the Texas State Fair Music Competition wouldn't be.  If they had won the college championships or a CARA award maybe.    Have they appeared on any national tv/radio?  How about statewide tv/radio?  Any media mentions?  Show us, using independent sources that this group is notable.  A few college awards doesn't do it.--- Balloonman  NO! I'm Spartacus! 16:19, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, to play devil's advocate for the beleaugered article creator here, the International Championship of Collegiate A Cappella appears to be "major" in a capella circles. I have added some media mentions to the article, though most are the college paper.  I can understand the creator's confusion because we have tons of a capella group articles. E.g., Articles for deletion/On a Sensual Note (2nd nomination) (redirected in 06 but recreated in 08), Articles for deletion/Amalgamates (kept in 06, sourcing is spotty).--Milowent (talk) 18:25, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I know about the ICCA, yes it is major in a capella circles... but you have to put that caveat on there "in a capella circles." How many a capella groups are currently signed to Major Labels?  Besides Straight No Chaser, I'd be surprised if there are any.  A capella holds a small niche so I'd want to see them win one of these events or be covered in the larger media.  Most of the A capella groups that I looked at did just that showed independent sources.  (The school paper doesn't count for much.)--- Balloonman  NO! I'm Spartacus! 18:30, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Milowent makes a good point in bringing up the other deletion nominations regarding collegiate a cappella. In those situations, the articles were kept, while the groups are no more notable than the one in-question here. Sparqman said in defense of On a Sensual Note (who still have an article, as you can see) in '06 that "The 'some are more notable than others' argument is exceptionally weak, even in the case of the Whiffenpoofs. No one outside of a cappella and New Haven knows who they are, even the presidents they've sung for." If the Wikipedia community wants to come to a compromise regarding collegiate a cappella groups having articles, so that literally every new a cappella group's page won't be marked for deletion at least once, I'd like to be a part of it. If the only collegiate groups with Wikipedia articles were those with Grammy nominations or won the ICCAs, you would have a very short list- and if that's what Wikipedia wants, then Wikipedia needs to implement that across the board. Iitywimwybmad (talk) 15:22, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well "wikipedia" is merely the collection of assorted editors that happen to come across this deletion discussion. Most deletion discussions are not too difficult, but ones on the margins don't always have consistent results.  If you can find more articles about this group, it would help.--Milowent (talk) 19:53, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * First AFD's from 4 years ago don't mean much---that is anceint history in internet terms. Second, ICCA/CARA winners would be a way to assert notability.  I would accept either as defacto notability.  Both ICCA/CARA offer multiple awards---there is the big one, but they have other awards as well (which probably wouldn't prove notability on their own, but would go towards asserting it.)  But without the CARA/ICCA title, then I would expect the group to meet the generally accepted guidelines for notability found at WP:N.  Many of the pages that I've looked at do include coverage in outside independent sources.--- Balloonman  NO! I'm Spartacus! 20:07, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

A few random clicks on other A capella groups: I did a random search on seven of the a capella groups out there. 2 of those 7 failed to show notability and a third one was fairly weak, but the other 4 clearly deserve articles.--- Balloonman  NO! I'm Spartacus! 20:24, 20 April 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ℳøℕø 00:58, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Meddiebempsters Lousy article, but performed for the President, did an overseas tour with the USO, and repeat visits with the DOD.
 * Beelzebubs didn't have to get further than the lead---international touring and 2nd place on an NBC television competition, multiple CARA awards, Major label contract
 * Princeton Tigertones-and has traveled across the United States, Europe, and Asia to perform in such storied venues as New York City's Carnegie Hall, London's Barbican Centre, and aboard Cunard Line's Queen Elizabeth 2.[1] The Tigertones have performed before heads of state including President Bill Clinton[2] and the late Yitzhak Rabin.---covered by rolling stone and Life magazine.
 * The Idlers played for the president, recording contract with MGM, on NBC, Saturday Night Live, numerous notable people have come from the group.
 * The Earth Tones probably would be an AFD candidate, but I prodded it.
 * The Yale Alley Cats weak claims, but does meet MUSIC via international tours and appearance on Martha Stewart Live.
 * Simmons Sirens Prodded.
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete. The sources provided are not sufficient to establish this group's notability. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 17:32, 25 April 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.