Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Fresh Princes

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. Essjay ·  Talk 11:48, August 6, 2005 (UTC)

The Fresh Princes
Non-notable band. Joyous (talk) 02:26, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non notable. I would suggest a redirect to Fresh Prince of Bel-Air, but I can't imagine why anyone would search for that show with a plural CanadianCaesar 02:32, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

CanadianCaesar 02:53, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete Come back after that Grammy. Denni &#9775; 02:48, 2005 July 30 (UTC)
 * Don't delete This article is about a music group popular in the Long Island, New York underground, not the Will Smith show.  This is one of the few detailed accounts of its kind.  Popularity is not grounds for validity.  Information regarding this band is scant, and can only be found in a few magazines.  I feel bad for the experimental music community if they are all treated in the same manner as the Fresh Princes.  I have relatives of relatives who live in their hometown, and all of this information seems to be relevant and valid in regard to their history and personalities.
 * Vote by 24.184.172.80- user's second vote CanadianCaesar 02:53, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete pretty much typical bandity article, though a bit longer than most. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 02:52, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete I like this term "bandity". --malathion talk 02:56, 30 July 2005 (UTC)


 * do not deleteThe Fresh Princes, or Ozark Softscape, are absolutely wonderful. They are pioneers of this age.  While they seem to have a larger following in Asia, it is important for cultural scholars to have a place to find otherwise inaccessible material on them.  Rather than simply suggest deletion, it would be helpful for both those interested and the authors themselves for an explanation to be included.


 * Do not delete There are no limitations on the actual popularity of the subject of the article. Just because this subject is obscure to some, does not mean that it is innapropriate for this database. This is article is clear, concise, and to-the-point. It effectivly explains the topic of the article in an informative, and unadvertising manner. It provides no external links, and does not solicit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.47.1.254 (talk • contribs) 21:59, 29 July 2005


 * Keep This is an coherent, objective article regarding a group that is obviously important to a demographic of shifting its musical attention.  Its incidental lack of nationwide popularity is not a fair grounds of deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.184.172.80 (talk • contribs) 22:02, 29 July 2005 ...which would be this user's third vote.


 * Do not delete While this band is obscure, I belive that it does warrent a listing here at Wikipedia.  The information contained is well thought out and informitive.  Wikipedia is a place for information and this article is informative. DO NOT DELETE. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.47.66.179  (talk • contribs) 22:16, 29 July 2005
 * You're partially right, we love informative, thought out articles, but not everything needs one. For example, I could write a very thought out and informative article on my friend's dog. However, that dog is not worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. Because of that, we have rules such as WP:Notability and WP:Verifiability. Also, we have WP:MUSIC specifially for music. Please consider these policies before submitting any more articles. Sasquatch&#08242;&#08596;T&#08596;C 03:35, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn band vanity. Ken 03:26, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete --Dejan &#268;abrilo 03:26, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Don't delete The page is full of useful information for those who want to know more about this mysterious up and coming new group and is not soliciting. The page is nothing but useful for those that need information on the subject and that is wikipedia is for. (preceding unsigned comment by 24.185.13.48 03:29, July 30, 2005 UTC)
 * Again, refer to WP:Notability. Wikipedia is not an advertisement medium either. Once you have achieved notability, I would be happy to write an article about you, but for now, you have shown no evidence that this band is notable. Thanks! Sasquatch&#08242;&#08596;T&#08596;C 03:35, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * And I quote: There is no Wikipedia policy on notability, nor is this a proposal for one. I wish people would stop pretending otherwise. Lupin 16:22, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per responses above. Sasquatch&#08242;&#08596;T&#08596;C 03:35, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. A band who formed earlier this year and to date have not had a record commercially released or played a national tour. Therefore they don't comply with WP:MUSIC, popularity with sockpuppets notwithstanding. Capitalistroadster 03:43, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. I'm liking the term "bandity" and also am intrigued by how many voted "do not delete", quite interesting sockpuppets there, which I'm guessing are members of the band. -mysekurity 04:44, 30 July 2005 (UTC)

I would bet that the Fresh Princes have no idea this exists. There were quite a few mistakes in this article because they are basically about as popular today as Lung Leg. It might actually be flattering to them. It really is amazing how much they were able to contribute when they were under the Girls title. In any case, the "sockpuppets" you mention are a result of confusion in using the convoluted voting system.


 * Delete non-notable. --ThomasK 10:17, July 30, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete non-notable --Cholmes75 14:47, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless independent reputable sources are given for the information contained in the article. Lupin 16:24, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable. Fernando Rizo T/C 18:50, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Not even almost famous. Nandesuka 22:15, 30 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn band vanity. -- Etacar11   01:20, 31 July 2005 (UTC)

No one here likes The Fresh Princes? This is ridiculous! Why does everyone care so much anyway? Also, I recall that one of the people who voted against this article wrote a series on KISS. WHAT IS THE EXCUSE? (Unsigned comment by )
 * Comment Get a clue. Wikipedia has guidelines for what makes musicians notable. Please see WikiProject Music/Notability and Music Guidelines and don't take the VfD process personally. Multiple unsigned entries, from unregistered users, made to look like votes (except that the proper way to express Don't Delete is actually Keep) does not help your case. Only one vote can be considered. Making points outside of Wikipedia guidelines does not help your case, either. Whether we like them or not doesn't enter into it at all. Oh, and -- signing with 4 tildes " ~ " is easy. Watch: WCFrancis 08:12, 31 July 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete nn band vanity. JamesBurns 05:04, 1 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete.  ral  315  21:33, August 1, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Oddly enough I have run into valid forms of this band all over the wildly exciting internet. They are an ever popular and dare I say prolific band that many seem to enjoy. For the rest of you that have seemingly wasted much time on debating the inclusion or (mostly) exclusion of this entry, I pity you for trying to create such an exclusionary site for absolutely no reason. 68.117.137.4 03:29, 3 August 2005 (UTC)MJK68.117.137.4 03:29, 3 August 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, you must spend your time on a different wildly exciting internet than I do. A search for "The Fresh Princes" Pogsnatcher got me, count 'em, zero hits. A search for just "the fresh princes" got 138 hits, none that I could see referring to this group. So non-notable it is. No one here doubts the fact that your band is entertaining. But you do not have a track record. This encyclopedia stretches its arms far more broadly than any paper-based encyclopedia, but it is still an encyclopedia and it only accepts entries on those who have achieved some degree of notability. Please read the WP:MUSIC article to see what is required for a band article to make it here (and yes, it's not official policy yet, but it is about as close as you're going to get). Denni &#9775; 04:31, 2005 August 3 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page..