Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Keltic Dreams


 * 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. Nom withdrawn. SynergeticMaggot (talk) 00:25, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

The Keltic Dreams

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Urefererenced stub on a borderline-notable musical troupe. A Google News search throws up one quite substantial article in the New YorK Times, but nothing else except for one reference in a tabloid sunday newspaper. This seems to me to fall short of WP:MUSIC, which requires multiple non-trivial coverage, but the NYT article is substantial, which is why I am bringing the article here rather than PRODding it. I think it's a borderline case. Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:35, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Nomination withdrawn. More refs have been found and added, so notability now seems to be established. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 20:31, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions.  . -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ireland-related deletion discussions.  . -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 15:37, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

However, I'm not impressed with your most of your new references: the DogoNews story doesn't look to me like a reliable source, the International Herald Tribune story is a reprint of the New York Times story; only the 352-word Irish Times story looks substantial. The others are not significant sources; so the question is whether one NYT story plus 350 words in the Saturday Irish times meets WP:MUSIC. -- Brown HairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 17:30, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep. Other than the gnews hits, they've gotten some other coverage.  Apart from that, they've also been involved in some charity.  They have also participated in festivals and parades.  You shouldn't be too quick to discount them simply because they didn't show up in a single search. Celarnor Talk to me  16:25, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Re-read the nom: I didn't discount them. I did the research, assessed it as borderline, and brought the issue here for discussion.
 * I disagree. I think performing on national television is quite significant.  Celarnor Talk to me  00:30, 6 April 2008 (UTC)
 * They also received mention in the Boston Herald, where they were discussed as part of that edition's cover story. I think this more than passes our notability guidelines.  Celarnor Talk to me  00:55, 6 April 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep per 's sources, they seem to meet the criteria for coverage in multiple reliable sources. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 16:10, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment: I've added six references to the article; the nominator may want to take another look at it in it's current state. Celarnor Talk to me  16:15, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Per . Luk  suh
 * Keep. They were covered by the NYT, which is good enough for me. Celarnor's additions really helped out. &mdash;  Hello Annyong  (say whaaat?!) 16:21, 5 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Seems good enough to keep. ww2censor (talk) 18:59, 6 April 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.