Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stanford Mendicants


 * 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. --Core desat 01:31, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

Stanford Mendicants

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable college a cappella group. Only claim to notability is an unsubstantiated claim that "membership in the group is very competitive and considered prestigious." No sources. Savidan 23:01, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete-Not notable--Joebengo 23:21, 8 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep found 3 sources. Edison 15:07, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Since we're not talking about newspaper articles, etc. the sources alone do not demonstrate notability. Student newspapers can be used to demonstrate notability if they are being used to cite a fact which makes the group notable. Using a student newspaper to cite a anecdote does not accomplish this. 15:20, 9 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep per this lengthy article, as well as this one, which I will add as references shortly. Among the oldest collegiate a cappella groups on the West Coast. JavaTenor 17:48, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Human interests pieces in local newspapers also could establish notability, but what fact from these articles makes them notable? Savidan 14:57, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it your assertion that these articles constitute "trivial" coverage or that the San Francisco Chronicle and San Jose Mercury News are unreliable sources? WP:MUSIC seems clear on what constitutes a trivial mention (and the articles presented don't fall under that category, in my opinion), but I suppose there is room for disagreement on that point.  Nevertheless, the Chronicle article notes multiple international concert tours per item 3 here and that the group is among the first of its kind on the West Coast (which could qualify for item 6 or multiple items here). YMMV. JavaTenor 16:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ezeu 00:24, 14 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. The sources Edison and JavaTenor found are sufficient.  &mdash;Cel  ithemis  00:55, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, seems notable to me... --Cremepuff222  ( talk,  review me! ) 01:13, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, source establish notability. Mmoyer 02:32, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak keep, would like to see more info on this group, but refs seem okay the_undertow talk  02:33, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - No assertion of notability.-- Bryson { Talk } { Edits } 03:14, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, secondary sources look good. - Ctbolt 06:18, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per the added sources, which show a reasonable level of notability for this college group. -FisherQueen (Talk) 13:14, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep marginally notable. --Duke of Duchess Street 17:31, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep There are a number of sources. Aequo 19:47, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Has references and definitely appears notable. P.B. Pilhet  21:01, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep notable and has reliable sources.  V 6 0  干什么？ · VDemolitions  ·  ER 3 21:45, 14 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep The references posted here are enough to demonstrate that they meet WP:Music. A1octopus 15:56, 18 April 2007 (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.