Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star FK Radium


 * 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   no consensus.  Sandstein  08:22, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Star FK Radium

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Fails WP:Band and WP:V: non-notable band with no references based on reliable, third-party published sources. There are many sources in the article, but they're all blogs or reviews by independent/unreliable webzines. Only The Deli looks legitimate in any way (and that's a stretch), but it's a single source and it's an interview. A Google search turned up nothing else of note. This isn't much to write an actual article around, and certainly not enough to demonstrate notability. Wyatt Riot (talk) 04:41, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete &mdash; I know this is considered immaterial to whether the article is notable enough for inclusion, but a YouTube video from 2008 featuring a song off their debut album has received over 100 000 views, which is a bit above average for a largely unknown band. Nevertheless, they remain exactly that - a largely unknown band.  Master&amp;  Expert ( Talk ) 13:44, 11 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:41, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

http://washington.thedelimagazine.com/7554/interview-star-fk-radium-dc-delis-band-month-october http://buzzpop.tumblr.com/post/917207047/starfkradium-interview http://www.musicalnews.com/articolo.php?codice=19490&sz=4 http://trippintherift.com/en/archives/396 http://www.angelica-music.com/reviews/star-fk-radium-blue-siberia-album-review http://www.burnyourears.de/reviews/cd/11509-star-fk-radium-blue-siberia http://www.ilpopolodelblues.com/rev/ago10/recensione/starfkradium.html http://www.metal-revolution.com/plugins/content/content.php?content.2898 http://www.districtofsound.com/archive/the-landscape-of-star-fk-radium.html http://wwww.babyblaue-seiten.de/album_10851.html http://www.maelstrom.nu/ezine/review_iss70_5664.php?sid=e3b6f1b5e87f9534ae9d97463cfa61f2&section=3 http://www.metalcentre.com/webzine.php?p=reviews&nr=3877&lang=eng http://thehotsheetpca.com/star-fk-radium-%E2%80%93-call-it-%E2%80%98chamber-rock%E2%80%99-455.html#more-455 http://leonardslair.wordpress.com/2010/07/17/review-star-fk-radium-blue-siberia/ http://www.musikansich.de/review.php?id=8624 http://www.rocktimes.de/gesamt/s/star_fk_radium/blue_siberia.html http://www.rockmetalbands.com/Star_FK_Radium_review.htm http://www.timemachinemusic.org/2011/04/star-fk-radium-blue-siberia/ http://www.citysbest.com/baltimore/news/2011/03/09/novo-fest-winds-down-at-the-windup-space/ http://acrn.com/features/previews/?review=186 http://hangingsounds.blogspot.com/2011/01/review-star-fk-radium-blue-siberia-2010.html http://www.jerrylucky.com/reviews%20s-t_050.htm http://www.progressor.net/review/sfkr_2011.html http://www.kathodik.it/modules.php?name=Reviews&rop=showcontent&id=4433 http://www.dprp.net/reviews/201066.php#star http://wwww.babyblaue-seiten.de/album_10851.html http://eyelevel.si.edu/2010/11/luce-unplugged.html http://thesilentballet.com/dnn/Home/tabid/36/ctl/Details/mid/367/ItemID/3720/Default.aspx http://www.movimentiprog.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=Recensioni&file=view&id=3295 http://rjominn.is/2011/09/28/star-fk-radium-josies-porch-swing/''' 16:26, 13 December 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jenuity90 (talk • contribs)
 * Delete. WP:TOOSOON. Just not notable enough as yet. --Legis (talk - contribs) 03:55, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. A Google search turns up many articles written about the band from at least 10 different countries and languages. I think this clearly fits Wikipedia's criteria of "Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself."  Many of these articles are extremely reliable sources such as the Deli Magazine which has national coverage, Musical News (one of the biggest music websites in Italy), and BuzzPop (very well known from Germany).  A partial list of the articles found follows:
 * The Deli is a two-person publication, and the article is an interview. BuzzPop is some guy's blog. Musical News appears to be just another unreliable, pay-per-article music site; when I tried to get information on the author or the site's editorial policies, I found that most of these links are nothing more than email addresses. No, we need sources that are non-trivial and reliable and independent, not just one of the above. (See WP:IRS for information about finding reliable sources.) Even if everyone in the world blogged about this band, we would still require legitimate music journalism to base our articles upon. I hope this helps. Wyatt Riot (talk) 22:48, 13 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, v/r - TP 16:36, 19 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. After doing some research, it looks like a number of those articles are non-trivial, reliable and independent. For instance the Il Popolo Del Blues article ( http://www.ilpopolodelblues.com/rev/ago10/recensione/starfkradium.html ) is edited by Ernesto De Pascale, who is a very well known, independent and non-trivial journalist - https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Ernesto_De_Pascale'''  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redwhite65 (talk • contribs) 23:33, 20 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I still don't see how this meets WP:BAND. A tiny review of their album in a web zine doesn't help us write an encyclopedia article about the band itself. WP:BAND criteria also excludes interviews, because we write based on what music journalists say about the band, not what the band says about itself. Wyatt Riot (talk) 05:51, 21 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. To add to the discussion, I would point out that along with the above mentioned Pascale, Jerry Lucky is a published author of multiple books on music, such as The Progressive Rock Files, The Progressive Rock Handbook, and 20th Century of Rock and Roll: Progressive Rock. He is definitely a credible, independent journalist, and has written about this band, which meets WP:BAND.  I agree that there are many other bands on wikipedia that have zero credible sources and should be deleted, but I think this band does indeed pass based on a handfull of their sources. 64.7.173.130  (talk) 11:26, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * No, he has written about the album, and it's still a relatively short review. We require sources about the subject of the article, which is the band. Wyatt Riot (talk) 18:01, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * This argument that an article about an album does not indicate notability for the band is quite unique. If bands cannot pick up coverage for things they do, such as albums and concerts, should they wear some particularly striking socks and hope to gain notability that way? 86.44.31.213 (talk) 21:57, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Sources about albums (such as reviews) help us write article about albums. Sources about bands help us write articles about bands. Yes, there's overlap, of course, but these sources don't "count" towards WP:BAND because they don't speak towards the notability of this band. Even our notability requirements for music admits that notable bands may issue non-notable albums, and non-notable bands may release notable albums. In other words, notability isn't inherited. Wyatt Riot (talk) 22:40, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Of course sources about albums count towards wp:band. what in the notability requirements for music suggests that non-notable bands may release notable albums? i couldn't find that. what type of sources are you seeking, sort of overviews of multiple albums? bands with only one album cannot be notable unless articles also treat of their concerts, and vice versa? or articles that mention the members' hobbies or something? 86.44.31.213 (talk) 23:18, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:NALBUMS states that "an album does not need to be by a notable artist to require a standalone article if it meets the General notability guideline". This article is about the band, so we're looking for sources that tell us about the band itself: the history, style and themes (if any), influences (either their influences or who they've influenced), and, most importantly for our purposes here, why they're important. Like User:Legis, I feel that WP:TOOSOON is a big factor here. They may warrant their own article in the future, but we're putting the cart before the horse here and the sources need to exist before we can write an article. Wyatt Riot (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * I haven't formed an opinion about the present case. i'm just boggled by the idea that a subject's work being reviewed doesn't indicate notability for the subject. 86.44.31.213 (talk) 00:07, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * It's kind of odd, yes, but within the context of building an encyclopedia it makes sense. If critics and journalists only discussed works of art and not the artists, then you'd only find articles on works of art here. Thankfully, that's usually not the case, at least with established artists. Wyatt Riot (talk) 00:32, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * well, i don't agree that's the consensus position -- editors seem happy to define a subject's notability by their work, certainly in this field -- but i see what you're saying. 86.44.31.213 (talk) 01:31, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 *  Keep . I speak Italian, so I looked in to Musical News a bit farther.  They are one of the top three music journalism websites in Italy, and very credible.  What specifically led you to the conclusion that they are a pay-per-article site?  I couldn't find a shred of evidence of that.  Not familiar with Jerry Lucky, but his publications and books look legit as well.  Hope that helps. 15:07, 21 December 2011 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redwhite65 (talk • contribs)
 * The website layout is very similar to other pay-per-article sites that we don't use as sources here on Wikipedia. For example: by-lines with an email address instead of a link to a journalist's credentials; a method for bands to request reviews and interviews directly on the "Editorial" page; and numerous authors with "yahoo.it" and "hotmail.it" addresses. The entire site comes across as amateurish. And, since it needs to be mentioned again, the link is to a review of the band's album, not about the band itself. Plus, it's a very short review with no real content we can use to write an article about the band. This is exactly why criteria 1 of WP:Band calls for "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself" written about "the subject", not their self-released album. Please also keep in mind that this isn't a vote, and that starting each reply with "Keep" is unnecessary. Wyatt Riot (talk) 20:52, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * note: I struck Red's extraneous "keep". 86.44.31.213 (talk) 23:38, 21 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Not liking the "appearance" of one of the sources is not an objective reason to delete an article. Also, please site wikipedia's documentation where it states that a band with a notable album (over 120,000 hits on youtube and sources from 10+ countries) is not itself notable.  An artist and their notable work go hand in hand. 21:42 21 December 2011 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redwhite65 (talk • contribs)
 * Nyan Cat has 54 million views on YouTube and has become a global Internet meme, but you won't find articles on prguitarman, daniwell, or saraj00n here on Wikipedia. Big numbers don't matter; quality sources do. I'm really not trying to be a dick here, but I've already linked to WP:NALBUMS and explained that notability is not inherited. Wyatt Riot (talk) 02:12, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I read WP:NALBUMS very carefully, and it states that album credibility is not inherited from an already notable band.  That's not the issue here.  Please point me to the specific wikipedia standards which state that a band having a notable album such as Blue Siberia are not themselves therefore considered notable.  03:22, 22, December 2012  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Redwhite65 (talk • contribs) 08:25, 22 December 2011 (UTC)
 * "Conversely, an album does not need to be by a notable artist to require a standalone article if it meets the General notability guideline" (WP:NALBUMS). Releasing notable albums can (but doesn't always) prove an artist or band to be notable. WP:BAND specifically requires that they chart nationally, be certified gold, etc. In those situations, yes, an album can make the band notable (providing it's sufficiently referenced), but these do not appear to be the case for this band. For our purposes here, an article on the band, the band must be "the subject" of quality sources unless they meet other criteria of WP:BAND. Wyatt Riot (talk) 13:20, 22 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep. Wikipedia Notability music "...may be notable if it meets Italic text one Italic text of the following criteria. 10:30, 22 December 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drynevada (talk • contribs)
 * 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.