Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ruth Adams and the World's Most Dangerous Polka Band


 * 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 keep – meets notability requirements as subject of a short documentary film (which is listed at IMDB as the winner of an award from a small film festival, for what that's worth) and an Esquire article. - Krakatoa  Katie  01:03, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Ruth Adams and the World's Most Dangerous Polka Band
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Tagged for speedy delete and contested. Dispute as to whether current article meets WP:Band. -- VS talk 21:18, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  00:44, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. The award-winning short film about the band is sufficient as a third-party reference to establish notability. "It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable." --Eastmain (talk) 04:32, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - in addition tob the film, they have press coverage about them like this Minnesota Daily article. -- Whpq (talk) 17:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - oops. That's a university newspaper which isn't regarded as a reliable source.  The other ones are from the Star Tribune which is a reliable source but the articles are behind pay walls. But still a keep for me based on the Start tribune and other perss. -- Whpq (talk) 17:34, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - Why is a university newspaper any less reliable than a regular daily? I've worked for both, and in my experience, the production values and the care with which the paper was created was MUCH superior at the university paper. Applejuicefool (talk) 14:18, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete The notability establishment is shaky at best. I don't see "multiple non-trivial published works" that qualify as reliable.  Just that supposed film.  Besides, none of this supposed notability is actually established in the article.  The only actual article material I see that might even qualify as claiming notability is the notice of inclusion in a show that failed faster than most people blink.  --  Oni Ookami Alfador Talk 14:11, 15 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - FYI, Let's Bowl lasted for 2 seasons on CC, a season more than Freak Squad, Wanda Does It, I'm With Busey, Kid Notorious, etc. And why do you say "supposed" film? The film exists, is available for purchase, and has won awards at film festivals. Dislike the entry all you want, but don't try to discount reliable sources by making them sound as if they are not so. -206.188.172.30 (talk) 17:14, 15 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep. An appearance on Comedy Central is definitely notable. Applejuicefool (talk) 14:19, 15 January 2008 (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.