Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tristar and Red Sector Incorporated (3rd nomination)


 * 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. Although there were more keep !votes, many of them are SPA accounts. There does not seem to be consensus based in policy and guidelines to support keeping or deleting this article. v/r - TP 23:00, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Tristar and Red Sector Incorporated
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

non-notable warez group Ridernyc (talk) 04:02, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable warez group that has been unanimously kept twice. jorgenev 06:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment "Unanimous" by the same handful of editors who actually never established notability. There are no third-party sources. As it stands, this fails WP:NOTE. Where are the sources?  freshacconci  talk talk  14:15, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 13:45, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 13:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 13:46, 15 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. A "notable warez group that has been unanimously kept twice": so where are the sources? Looking at the last two discussion there's a great deal of bad-faith attacking of the nominators for not knowing what this is supposed to be and some really weak justifications of self-published references being used to establish notability. It's been four years since the last AFD: where are the third-party sources? As someone who hasn't a clue what the hell this is supposed to be about, why have there been no edits by the supporters of the two AFDs to bring this up to standards? It's poorly written and makes no attempt to explain what Tristar and Red Sector Incorporated is supposed to be. The previous AFDs insist that this is notable. I see no evidence yet. I am holding off on a !vote for now.  freshacconci  talk talk  14:05, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment I was hopeful that Wikipedia had grown beyond the "are you crazy, of course this is notable" arguments. The previous AFD's for this are basically irrelevant, compared to our current policies there was basically no inclusion criteria back than. I have yet to see a valid argument made for keeping this article.  There has also been no improvement to the article in 6 years.  While I would love for these groups to have pages and detailed histories on here, there are just no reliable sources for any of it at this time. Ridernyc (talk) 18:40, 15 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment. This article is administered on a regular bases and states information about one of the three underground computer scene groups, which founded the scene in the 1980's. Over the years, there have been many attempts to delete this site, also sections of it, by people from the scene, for various reasons. TRSI represents a group of people, working creatively in programing, graphics, animation and alternative platforms, recognized by peers all over the digital sphere. Many productions are link referenced. Keep this part of pop culture on Wikipedia, due to public interest! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.191.34.218 (talk) 13:04, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Why delete a page of such public interest. All involved in tech sociology know about this group, you can back-check all their mentioned products on www.scene.org or www.pouet.net or even go to www.trsi.de and verify. Tristar and Red Sector Incorporated is computer history, why not let folks know about them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caesar.Press (talk • contribs) 16:23, 16 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The "public interest" has nothing to do with it. This needs verifiable, third-party sources.  freshacconci  talk talk  23:04, 17 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You're right, how DARE Wikipedia think of the public interest! It's not like they're the ones reading this stuff!189.222.12.246 (talk) 23:04, 20 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment. TRSI are the biggest of the big. Here's almost 200 reasons why deleting is not only inappropriate but unquestionably malicious: http://pouet.net/groups.php?which=280 or http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=trsi+demo . These digital arts superheroes devoted huge portions of their lives to create some of the most memorable and genre-defining pieces of real-time art a person could wish a computer to subject them to. To dismiss the group as a mere 'warez' group is to fail to take the effort to inform oneself of simple facts. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dongledan (talk • contribs) 18:18, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Do you have any sources to back up those claims?  freshacconci  talk talk  21:28, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Is the reason to delete this entry really just the comment 'not-notable warez group' ? TRSI is far more: a demo-scene group which evolved from their cracking roots from the 1980 and 90s (far before the the term warez was used.) If noteable in the warez context: they have been one of the first groups which have been involved in cracking software (an interesting historical aspect, I think). So first : the comment "just a warez group" wouldn´t fit. Second: They also have taken part in creating intros,demos and few breakthroughs for the demoscene (so from a historical view more than just notable in context with the demoscene) and still are creating demos, music and graphics in the demoscene context.(compare the last entries at pouet which is the website to check for demoscene releases: http://www.pouet.net/groups.php?which=280&order=release) Compared to that it would be as if you would say from a famous band that they are not notable. But the demoscene as a sub-culture is sometimes intransparent for outsiders, so maybe this could have lead to suggest the deleting. I think the facts themself tell something different — Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.247.10.32 (talk • contribs)


 * Comment. I'd like to add this link to back up some information: http://noname.c64.org/csdb/group/?id=602 from being in the scene these days, I can assure you that the claim made on this Scene-driven-website is pretty correct: 1993 they were pretty much the most influential cracking-group on the C-64 with lots of different intros, an enormous amount of releases. Deleting an article on the group is pretty much like showing to have no clue whatsoever. I agree though, that the article might need some polish, but that is no reason for deletion, just for amelioration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.115.1.239 (talk) 06:55, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

http://no-copy.org/trsi.html (A german book) DataBecker is a german software company http://www.databecker.de/ DataBecker sold the Red Sector Demo Maker in the 1990er look here: http://www.classicamiga.com/images/stories/jreviews/software/R/rsi%20demo%20maker%20%281991%29%28red%20sector%29_001.png — Preceding unsigned comment added by 77.184.13.89 (talk) 21:32, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Why do you want do delete this aricle? I've an old very big paper encyclopedia at home, but I don't use it very often because I use wikipedia because there are much more articles like this init. TRSI is an old cracker and demo group and it's not impossible to find sources for it. Look at http://www.pouet.net/groups.php?which=280&order=release look at http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demomaker and much more. You will find very much articles about TRSI. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 145.243.194.45 (talk • contribs)
 * Neither of those are reliable sources per WP:RS. The latter is the German Wikipedia. How is that helpful? If there are no third-party sources available to verify any of the claims, I can't imagine !voting for anything other than delete at this time.  freshacconci  talk talk  14:00, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete. I've tried finding something, anything that could help establish and verify the notability of this. I've searched under both Tristar and Red Sector Incorporated and TRSi. There are no third-party sources out there. Everything is connected to the actual warez group. I do actually believe the supporters here that this group has this history but without actual WP:RS nothing can be verified. The only "keep" !vote so far doesn't actually provide an actual rationale for keep other than this has survived two AFDs in the past. Looking at those two discussions, there were no arguments given to establish notability here. Since the last AFD four years ago nothing has been brought forward to help. Unless third-party sources rather than anecdotal evidence can be brought forward, there is no option other than to delete.  freshacconci  talk talk  14:07, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * You are the perfect example of everything that is wrong with Wikipedia editors these days. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.34.78.226 (talk) 23:02, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment In this case you should delete all entries for demoscene and all related entries. There are parties every year (you can look up site like these where the results of the contests are shown(http://breakpoint.untergrund.net/results.php - a official party with an official contest)and search for trsi and you have reference. Informations from other sources (same precedures:look up and search trsi) http://revision-party.net/history/2011 or http://blog.zdf.de/3sat.neues/2010/05/31/trsi-demo_fur_android/ (a small report shown from the german tv-channel 3sat) or check books like:"Freax: The Brief History of the Computer Demoscene". Most informations of the demoscene can be found in discmags which has been a standard way to exchange information before the web in the demoscene if you don´t see a scroller below a demo as a reference (which has been the first way to exchange greetings and infos ).
 * Comment I think freshacconi hates TRSI, because you find very much about in the web like this:
 * Strong Keep A warez group made it into multiple published books in a foreign language. Welp, there's your notability. Time Magazine isn't writing about warez groups. The New York Post doesn't put that day's warez articles next to the ones about what strain of hep A-Rod caught this week. The notability guidelines are awful, laughable, and obviously inapplicable to something like a warez group, which centers around a subversive scene and illegal activity. Now, having said that, welcome to the part where the one guy has made this the literal center of his life handwaves over the very sources he was asking for via self-parroting and gets it nuked anyway. — Preceding unsigned comment added by IceCreamJonsey (talk • contribs)
 * Hey, I tried finding sources and held off !voting. I have no vested interest in this being kept or deleted. Unfortunately, underground means less legitimacy. That's the way the world works sometimes. As for the sources provided above, the first link is a single line in a book. The other two, I have no idea what those are supposed to be. So what we have is one book which mentions this group in passing. Sorry, per Wikipedia guidelines, that is trivial. Everyone (if these comments are from more than one editor) really needs to read WP:V and WP:RS.  freshacconci  talk talk  00:06, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - I've heard of them, they are notable in their subject area. They are mentioned (admittedly briefly) in published sources, e.g.: . Someone with more familiarity with the subject could probably come up with better ones, Google doesn't scan everything. The article could certainly use some sourcing but I don't think deletion is the solution. DopefishJustin (talk) 01:59, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - some additional publications mentioning their 'notability' and   — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonnosan (talk • contribs) 09:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Even network television features TRSI productions, so how can you say, there are no third party references = http://blog.zdf.de/3sat.neues/2010/05/31/trsi-demo_fur_android/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.191.34.218 (talk) 16:10, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - The scholarly works linked above by Jonnosan meet WP:RS guidelines. Dyer-Witheford is a noted scholar of computer history: if he claims something is important, that is good enough for me. Dariusk (talk) 19:19, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - I don't think that the aforementioned link meet the requirement of "significant coverage". They are mentioned in passing once. Vertigo Acid (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - Along with the whole lot of these demoscene and warez group pages. If the "scene" wants to have its own "in-universe" warezipedia or whatever, then by all means. But by their very nature, underground groups like this only receive 3rd party, reliable sources when they are of importance. If all you have is a bunch primary sources, and a passing mention in a book, you don't meet WP:NOTE. Vertigo Acid (talk) 19:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - I'd also like to point out that all of the commenting IPs so far have only ever edited this AFD and the article in question. Food for thought. Vertigo Acid (talk) 19:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)
 * It's almost like some people only edit and comment on things they're knowledgeable about. Imagine that! 95.34.78.226 (talk) 02:30, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Says the guy who vandalized the page. Doesn't exactly help your case. Vertigo Acid (talk) 19:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Also, for people who would like to see references of TRSI in third person literature, try to read:  http://www.amazon.de/Hackerland-Logbuch-Szene-Denis-Moschitto/dp/3932170296/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1308727258&sr=8-1      and      http://www.amazon.de/Freax-Brief-History-Computer-Demoscene/dp/3981049403  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caesar.Press (talk • contribs) 07:27, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Those would actually help to establish notability if you would be able to provide page numbers and give us a sense of how TRSi is discussed in those books. My German is limited but if we could verify those two books discuss TRSi in detail, that definitely help. As I've said, I have no vested interest in keeping or deleting this article and I believe the supporters here when they say this group has a significant history. However, one core policy is verifiability. And policy is not negotiable.  freshacconci  talk talk  13:19, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - I feel very sorry for me and my group that ppl still call us a warez group. We where the first who released a demo on android, we where the first who released a demo on xbox360. We are party of the mainorganizing teams of Breakpoint (http://breakpoint.untergrund.net)(rip),Revision (http://www.revision-party.net) and Mainparty in France (http://www.mainparty.net) the biggest pure demoscene events on the entire planet. We havent crack software since years...so actually to call us a warezgroup is a farce. I guess the hate in this discussion comes from a totally other direction, and shall only be covered/hidden here with other topics. TRSi even had its own record label... so wtf. If TRSi is only "3rd Party mentioned" then "Hells Angels" and all other Motorcycleclubs should be deleted here aswell - because theya are aswell only 3rd Party mentioned. / - docd/TRSi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thedocd (talk • contribs) 12:15, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, if you actually look at the Hells Angels article, there are 159 references from third-party sources, so that's not a particularly good example of an article lacking third-party sources. Given the Hells Angels history, they of course have been covered by countless news sources and books. And there's no hate here, we're just trying to maintain Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Again, I ask people to actually read WP:V and WP:RS. We need sources not connected to TRSi that discuss the group in a bit of detail, not just a brief mention. As for any articles lacking good sources, read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Wikipedia is huge and has a relatively small number of volunteer editors. There are plenty of badly written unsourced articles out there. Because one has slipped by the attention of editors is not a reason to keep this article.  freshacconci  talk talk  13:14, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Find some news coverage of these events and how TRSi relates to it, then. If it's not being covered by reliable sources (see WP:RS), then it's not going to meet WP:V. For example, PDXLAN is one of the biggest LAN parties on the west coast of the US, and has been running for a decade or so now. Since it doesn't get independent coverage in reliable sources, you won't find a wikipedia article about it, or its founder, rightfully so. Just because something is big and important to you doesn't mean that it meets notability and verifiability requirements for inclusion in wikipedia.Vertigo Acid (talk) 19:43, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - This starts becoming a biased farce, when two people decide to delete an article they don't appreciate, then get proved wrong and then decide to ignore all facts that are put forward. If they had any knowledge of the subject matter, this would all be pointless in the first place. Everybody in tech sociology and grassroots digital realms knows TRSI to be one of the founding institutions of the homebrew and scene community and the ones outside, stay outside. Go to www.pouet.net or www.bitfellas.org and start reading the forums. You might learn something new. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.191.34.218 (talk) 23:13, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
 * We don't use fora to establish notability, and in this case, reliability. Take a look at WP:V:  You claims may be true, but unless you have evidence, I couldn't tell if you were lying or not.Curb Chain (talk) 23:48, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep more links - Even in the world of Elektro Music, TRSI left a mark, as you can read here: (http://www.4players.de/4sceners.php/dispnews/-/2058557/index.html) Also, see these pages for further third party references: (http://www.defacto2.net/groups.cfm?mode=detail&org=pe-trsi-defjam-tdt) and (http://www.defacto2.net/groups.cfm?mode=detail&org=trsi) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caesar.Press (talk • contribs) 15:06, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - How do those links meet WP:RS? Vertigo Acid (talk) 18:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - For an example of a demogroup that meets the necessary requirements, see Future Crew. Coverage in reliable secondary sources establishing notability. Vertigo Acid (talk) 18:51, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Okay, so here are the external links for Future Crew (by the way, "hi" to Skaven): Pouet.net / Defacto2.net / Scene.org / Music Magazine / YouTube.com ... Guess what, those were all already mentioned for TRSi on this page here! And by the way, talking about YouTube: (http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=trsi&aq=f) gets over 600 hits for TRSI productions, posted by third parties. Notice something? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.191.34.218 (talk) 20:19, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I really, really wish people would read WP:V before posting. There is a huge lack of understanding about what a reliable source is and what "third-party" means. Youtube is not a source. People commenting on youtube are not reliable sources, are not "third-party" sources, even if they are unaffiliated with TRSi. Sources must be published, print or web, but, again, read WP:V & WP:RS to find out what counts as a source.  freshacconci  talk talk  21:19, 23 June 2011 (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.