Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Udjo Ngalagena


 * 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   delete. Drmies (talk) 02:07, 20 November 2012 (UTC)

Udjo Ngalagena

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

A person from Indonesia; the confusing article doesn't tell us what he might be notable for. A PROD in 2009 was declined because the subject was deemed likely notable. That may be so, but the article is borderline-incomprehensible junk and hasn't been improved since. Unless somebody wants to do this now, I recommend unprejudicial deletion per WP:TNT.  Sandstein  11:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Ay yi yi, um, delete Googling this hurt my brain. The only text I could find in anything resembling coherent English suggested (from the snippet I saw) that this is a type of gamelan orchestra and not a person. Everything else was either transliterated or as garbled as this is. I think there is considerable hope for notability; what there doesn't seem to be is anything that an article could be constructed from by English speakers. I think at this point that WP:TNT is the only way to go unless someone who is good in both Indonesian and English comes along and gives it a total rewrite. Mangoe (talk) 13:03, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. I think Saung Angklung Udjo, the youth music ensemble he founded, is more notable than he is.  There are quite a few Indonesian-language references that seem promising for an article about it.  I'm having a hard time finding reliable sources about the Udjo himself, especially outside the context of the ensemble.  I'm pretty sure this isn't a reliable, independent source, but it does serve as an English-language overview.  If the group had an article, I'd advocate merger.  Currently, it doesn't, and I'm willing to give the somewhat tenuous sourcing a pass in part to counter systemic bias: very little Indonesian-language reportage prior to about 2005 is available online, and I think it's virtually certain that there's more in local hardcopy about this man and the work he did, dating back to the ensemble's formation in 1967. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 15:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I have no objection to keeping if you can convert this into readable English with some minimal reliable sourcing. Systemic bias concerns, however, can't excuse keeping this sort of semi-nonsensical garble. Per WP:V, it's not enough that sources may exist somewhere, they need to be cited in the article or it has to go.  Sandstein   17:20, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I'll try to have something serviceable here later today or tomorrow. Seeing if I have any way to track down older Indonesian material before I get started on a rewrite.  Ideally, I'd like to do better than a stub. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 17:31, 13 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. Everything I could find in English, and a substantial amount of Indonesian sources, originated as press releases or something similar, so I'm giving up here.  I still think Saung Angklung Udjo could probably support an article based in part on dead tree Indonesian sources, but that's going to have to wait to be written by someone with better access to the material and more competence with the language than I do. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 14:32, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:16, 14 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:16, 14 November 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete. As well as non-notable, there is a possible conflict of interest as it looks as if the article creator's Google+ page links to a commercial organization promoting Udjo's music. Davidelit (Talk) 03:27, 14 November 2012 (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.