Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stars In Stereo


 * 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 Becca (musician).  → Call me  Hahc  21  05:46, 24 March 2014 (UTC)

Stars In Stereo

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:BAND. If anyone thinks otherwise, please specify which criterion under WP:BAND. Logical Cowboy (talk) 02:51, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 8 March 2014 (UTC)


 *  Keep [or AT A MINIMUM, redirect to "Becca (musician)"]  - I just added nine sources to Becca (musician) as follows:
 * The latter source indicates that the band ranked No.12 on Top Heatseekers in 2013 for their self titled album. In any event, with the references shown in both Becca (musician)  and Stars In Stereo, I strongly believe that one (if not both) of these two articles should remain. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response Thanks for your comments.  You haven't referred to any WP policies though.  This still looks like a clear fail of WP:BAND, and you haven't made any argument to the contrary.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:20, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 *  Reply  - WP:NBAND Bullet 1 "subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself" and WP:NBAND Bullet 2 "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart". --Jax 0677 (talk) 09:07, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response OK, thanks for replying.  This is still a fail of WP:BAND.  Most of the sources above are primarily about Becca, not the band; non-independent; not very impressive, e.g., blog or college press; or virtually a blank page.  Also, I would not count Heatseekers as the national music chart for the purpose of establishing notability.  By its nature, notable bands are omitted from the Heatseekers chart.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 20:32, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 *  Reply  - I have seven additional references that I just conjured up on Stars in Stereo. The references, in my opinion, are enough to write an article about their debut album in addition to writing an article about the band.  Furthermore, idobi and The State Press have articles on Wikipedia.
 * Last but not least, even if an article about the band is not warranted, I feel that "Stars in Stereo" should be redirected with the history in tact. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response OK, thanks, but there are some dodgy references in there. Like college newspapers (State Press) don't count per WP:BAND.  The MTV blurb is less than 100 words and seems to be some kind of wiki or other self-publishing entity.  The Noisecreep advertorial was done in partnership with the band--not independent.  The Nuvo article barely mentions Stars in Stereo.  Melodic and Starpulse are really brief.  The OK Gazette article is mainly an interview so it lacks independence.  I think you are making the case weaker not stronger here.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * The latter source indicates that the band ranked No.12 on Top Heatseekers in 2013 for their self titled album. In any event, with the references shown in both Becca (musician)  and Stars In Stereo, I strongly believe that one (if not both) of these two articles should remain. --Jax 0677 (talk) 17:59, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response Thanks for your comments.  You haven't referred to any WP policies though.  This still looks like a clear fail of WP:BAND, and you haven't made any argument to the contrary.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:20, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
 *  Reply  - WP:NBAND Bullet 1 "subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself" and WP:NBAND Bullet 2 "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart". --Jax 0677 (talk) 09:07, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response OK, thanks for replying.  This is still a fail of WP:BAND.  Most of the sources above are primarily about Becca, not the band; non-independent; not very impressive, e.g., blog or college press; or virtually a blank page.  Also, I would not count Heatseekers as the national music chart for the purpose of establishing notability.  By its nature, notable bands are omitted from the Heatseekers chart.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 20:32, 9 March 2014 (UTC)
 *  Reply  - I have seven additional references that I just conjured up on Stars in Stereo. The references, in my opinion, are enough to write an article about their debut album in addition to writing an article about the band.  Furthermore, idobi and The State Press have articles on Wikipedia.
 * Last but not least, even if an article about the band is not warranted, I feel that "Stars in Stereo" should be redirected with the history in tact. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response OK, thanks, but there are some dodgy references in there. Like college newspapers (State Press) don't count per WP:BAND.  The MTV blurb is less than 100 words and seems to be some kind of wiki or other self-publishing entity.  The Noisecreep advertorial was done in partnership with the band--not independent.  The Nuvo article barely mentions Stars in Stereo.  Melodic and Starpulse are really brief.  The OK Gazette article is mainly an interview so it lacks independence.  I think you are making the case weaker not stronger here.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Last but not least, even if an article about the band is not warranted, I feel that "Stars in Stereo" should be redirected with the history in tact. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response OK, thanks, but there are some dodgy references in there. Like college newspapers (State Press) don't count per WP:BAND.  The MTV blurb is less than 100 words and seems to be some kind of wiki or other self-publishing entity.  The Noisecreep advertorial was done in partnership with the band--not independent.  The Nuvo article barely mentions Stars in Stereo.  Melodic and Starpulse are really brief.  The OK Gazette article is mainly an interview so it lacks independence.  I think you are making the case weaker not stronger here.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Last but not least, even if an article about the band is not warranted, I feel that "Stars in Stereo" should be redirected with the history in tact. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response OK, thanks, but there are some dodgy references in there. Like college newspapers (State Press) don't count per WP:BAND.  The MTV blurb is less than 100 words and seems to be some kind of wiki or other self-publishing entity.  The Noisecreep advertorial was done in partnership with the band--not independent.  The Nuvo article barely mentions Stars in Stereo.  Melodic and Starpulse are really brief.  The OK Gazette article is mainly an interview so it lacks independence.  I think you are making the case weaker not stronger here.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Last but not least, even if an article about the band is not warranted, I feel that "Stars in Stereo" should be redirected with the history in tact. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response OK, thanks, but there are some dodgy references in there. Like college newspapers (State Press) don't count per WP:BAND.  The MTV blurb is less than 100 words and seems to be some kind of wiki or other self-publishing entity.  The Noisecreep advertorial was done in partnership with the band--not independent.  The Nuvo article barely mentions Stars in Stereo.  Melodic and Starpulse are really brief.  The OK Gazette article is mainly an interview so it lacks independence.  I think you are making the case weaker not stronger here.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Last but not least, even if an article about the band is not warranted, I feel that "Stars in Stereo" should be redirected with the history in tact. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:04, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response OK, thanks, but there are some dodgy references in there. Like college newspapers (State Press) don't count per WP:BAND.  The MTV blurb is less than 100 words and seems to be some kind of wiki or other self-publishing entity.  The Noisecreep advertorial was done in partnership with the band--not independent.  The Nuvo article barely mentions Stars in Stereo.  Melodic and Starpulse are really brief.  The OK Gazette article is mainly an interview so it lacks independence.  I think you are making the case weaker not stronger here.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Response OK, thanks, but there are some dodgy references in there. Like college newspapers (State Press) don't count per WP:BAND.  The MTV blurb is less than 100 words and seems to be some kind of wiki or other self-publishing entity.  The Noisecreep advertorial was done in partnership with the band--not independent.  The Nuvo article barely mentions Stars in Stereo.  Melodic and Starpulse are really brief.  The OK Gazette article is mainly an interview so it lacks independence.  I think you are making the case weaker not stronger here.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:27, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

 Reply  Therefore, at a minimum, we likely have good reviews in The State Press, idobi, Noisecreep, Huffington Post and Starpulse. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:25, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 * 1) If it is true that most of the sources are about Becca and not about Stars in Stereo, then why shouldn't Stars in Stereo redirect to "Becca (musician)"?
 * 2) Just because you "would not count Heatseekers as the national music chart for the purpose of establishing notability" does not make it so.  WP:NBAND only requires the band to meet one criteria to be potentially notable.
 * 3) The idobi article is independent, reliable and detailed.
 * 4) There is no evidence that the detailed Noisecreep article was done in conjunction with the band.
 * 5) If MTV is not a reliable source, I do not know what is.  The bio was written by Matt Collar of Rovi, and "seems to be some kind of wiki or other self-publishing entity" does not make it so.
 * 6) No issues with the Huffington Post article have been presented.
 * 7) I don't agree that the Starpulse article is brief, but Starpulse is used in the album review box of quite a few articles.
 * 8) While the Nuvo article may be short, the artist, and even the album could likely survive on reviews such as this one.
 * 9) There are several parts of the Oklahoma Gazette article which would contribute substantially to the "Critical Reception" of the artist and album.
 * WP:NBAND says "Articles in a school or university newspaper (or similar), in most cases" (not all cases) are the exception.
 * OK. WP:BAND does not say any chart.  In the case of Top Heatseekers, the chart excludes notable bands, so it does not establish notability.  The MTV page includes the text "Are You Stars In Stereo? Claim this page."  If you read the FAQ, it says that on "MTV Artists," bands are allowed to edit their own pages.  The HuffPo blog has less than 150 words about the band (other than the tour schedule, which is excluded under WP:BAND).  The Noisecreep article includes the phrase "Stars in Stereo have partnered with Noisecreep...."  The Starpulse article is 167 words, 118 about Stars in Stereo.  Honestly, Jax, every time you post something on this page, you just make the the case weaker and weaker.  And the cavassing   is unlikely to help.  Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:55, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
 *  Reply  -
 * Actually, "WP:NBAND" says "Has had a single or album on any country's national music chart". Billboard is a United States music magazine.  Top Heatseekers" is a chart that includes music artists from around the country and around the world such as Sherrié Austin and Texas Hippie Coalition.  The chart ranks artists by "the act's historical chart performance", therefore, not just any musician can place on the chart.
 * The Noisecreep article says "Stars in Stereo have partnered with Noisecreep to bring you the lyric video premiere for their album track". There is no evidence that the first two paragraphs and the last paragraph are not written independently by their staff.
 * There has been no objection made to the idobi article.
 * "In depth" is a relative term.
 * The plausibility of redirecting the article to something more broadly encompassing has not been discussed.+
 * I have added another reference from Allmusic (who was owned by Rovi Corporation) to back the MTV biography.Stars in Stereo | Biography
 * Is anyone else going to comment on this AfD? --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:06, 14 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge selectively to Becca (musician). Coverage from independent reliable sources such as HuffPost and Allmusic is still pretty faint. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 19:21, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:24, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge (selectively) and redirect to Becca (musician). I can't see there's enough to justify a stand-alone article but there's probably enough that some might search for it and redirects are cheap. Stalwart 111  08:49, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Delete Poorly written and doesn't meet WP:MUSICBIO. I don't think there's enough to merge to the other article but if someone wants to do that work, a redirect would not be out-of-the-question. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:13, 22 March 2014 (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.