Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yoiking with the Winged Ones


 * 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. No further consensus evolved after three weeks. If further evidence arises yea/nay on notability, of course there is no prejudice against a renomination. The Bushranger One ping only 08:51, 4 December 2015 (UTC)

Yoiking with the Winged Ones

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unreleased 2016 album. So far as I can see, none of the sources actually mention the album, they just support facts such as what yoiking is, that crow populations are declining, that flight is a metaphor, etc, so the article fails WP:NALBUM at present. I couldn't find any secondary sources myself. McGeddon (talk) 17:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The Record is mentioned in the Sámi Newspaper Ávvir 10/27/2015 url: http://avvir.no/kultuvra-oddasat/2015/10/dasa-cahka-fiinna-stuora-govva The record is also mentioned in NRK Sámi Radio radio show 'Duorastatmágasiidna' 29/10/20115 url: https://radio.nrk.no/serie/duorastatmagasiidna/SAPP43004415/29-10-2015  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80m6an (talk • contribs) 22:18, 6 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. Two sources have been added in a sort of external links way (not used as cited sources in the article). The major issue I see with the article is that the text of it is supported by no sources. There are many inline references, but not one of them support the article's content when it relates to the album in question. Manxruler (talk) 09:38, 7 November 2015 (UTC)


 * All this AfD is doing is determining whether the article should exist yet. If the new sources are in the wrong place and the article needs tidying up, that's fine, we can sort that out later.
 * I can't seem to autotranslate the first source from Norwegian and the second appears to be audio - can somebody verify that these sources provide the "significant coverage" and "enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article" that WP:NALBUM requires? (And that they're not interviews "where the musician or ensemble talks about the recording", which would be considered primary sources.) --McGeddon (talk) 09:47, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The reason you can't autotranslate the source from Norwegian, is that it isn't in Norwegian, but Northern Sami, for which no autotranslation exists. My knowledge of Sami language is extremely limited, but the Ávvir article appears to deal with Ánde Somby's career and his having made/being in the process of making an LP called "Juoiddá Joavdan" in collaboration with Chris Watson. Now, seeing as a cover with "Yoiking with the Winged Ones" appears in the article, "Juoiddá Joavdan" may be the Sami name for "Yoiking with the Winged Ones".


 * The NRK Sámi Radio link appears to be a portrait interview. Manxruler (talk) 10:25, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Just found a Northern Sami to Norwegian translator. You could run the text through that, and then from Norwegian to English through Google Translate (granted, I just did that, and the result from Norwegian to English is barely comprehensible). The Ávvir article (according to the Northern Sami to Norwegian translation result) is about Somby's career in general and his having announced on Facebook that he is about to release his first LP ("Juoiddá Joavdan"), with four joiks (songs). The LP (which may be the same as "Yoiking with the Winged Ones") is according to the the article recorded in the Lofoten Islands and had final work done in London, UK, by Chris Watson. It appears that Somby is stating that he is considering to have a release of the LP "Juoiddá Joavdan" in Tromsø, Norway, at some point "after the winter darkness" (probably meaning after 15 January 2016). Manxruler (talk) 12:01, 7 November 2015 (UTC)

Hello there

This editing has been an 'experience'.

It is not hard to understand the rationale for the rules in WP:NALBUM. Wikipedia can be flooded by lots of propmo material from different 'publishers' of records.

When applied to a world where lots of lots of records are published every minute - as the english speaking world. That rationale makes perfectly sence. In particular if that is a world equpped with a huge system of reviewing and evaluating. But if that is applied to worlds where records barely are published the rationale makes less sence. Many of the small cultures have the problem of invisibillity. That applies in particular to cultures where many parts of the culture is threatned by dying, such as the Sqmi Culture with the languag as very threatned and yoiking even more threatned. At the same time these small cultures have an urgent need to somehow 'speak' to the mightiest of cultures - the english speaking culture. Naturally this 'speak' is about sad things and problems. Yoiking with the Winged Ones is an attempt to 'speak' through something different. But oftentimes such attempts are 'killed' by principles that are created for other purposes - such as it appears again in this case. At least I can use this as an example in my teaching on the dilemma between the intended purpose of a principle and the actual consequenses of it - like in this case to add to the problem of invisibillity of Sami Culture (How many articles do you have about Sami Culture here?)

It is neither hard to understand that tagging makes the process of editing much more efficient, fast and requiring less work. But there are som challenges both when the tags are designed and when they in the next round are applied. Here it seems that the challenge is what the tag refers to when it mentiones 'topic'. Is it the very vinyl, its sounds and music, the images on the cover, the envelope, the weight of the record, the feeling when you open up the envelope or is the 'topic' the issues connected and mentioned in the text. In the first case WP:NALBUM only asks for reviews. It would be nice it that was communicated through a disclaimer, so that one would not start to use time to submit articles about records in Wikipedia unless they are reviewed. If WP:NALBUM asks references to the things mentioned in the text, then it becomes a question to reference use of metaphors and history of yoik and what not. When the prose, which is a metaphorical one was tagged, then I understood that as a direction to write referencial prose about the metaphors used.

I dont know how to understand this. Maybe Wikipedias editorial culture is all settled with conventions that seem obvious for the insiders and erratic for newcomers. Maye this is not a welcomening system for newcomers any more and that to try to contribute here ends up being a waste of time. If that is the case, that also would be a good thing to mention in a disclaimer, so that one as a newbie do not end up in such processes as this one.

For me this isnt a total waste of time though. I can pehaps use this case in my course in legal sociology that I teach at the Law faculty. We have some interesting topics involved here - how a regulation is communicated, how the enforcers of the regulation understand and practice the regulation, how formal equal treatment can end up as an unequal treatment. In this case how formally equal regulations in WP:NALBUM intended to limit flooding end up practically blocking any record from indigenous peoples from having an entry. Not many if any if any indigenous cultures have a structure similar to the english reviewing system.

80m6an (talk) 13:32, 8 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Even if this topic is notable, the article should be WP:TNT with the mess of original research, poor writing, and non-NPOV. From what I can tell, there isn't reliable, independent coverage of the topic anyways. FuriouslySerene (talk) 14:22, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:34, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:34, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:34, 12 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor Talk! 18:52, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep but with reservations - seems like it is a project of importance to the musical heritage of the Sami cultural group. The page is fairly well sourced with good quality references, but the main problem is that many of the references are basically off-topic for the general audience reading this encyclopedia. I enjoyed seeing a reference to an academic work investigating the idea of "The Sublime From Antiquity to the Present. ", but it requires a leap of imagination to understand how that fits within a page discussing an art project in an obscure European language.
 * Together with the edits above, this suggests to me that 80m6an is new to wikipedia and has written something as would be expected in an academic publication, and is close to (if not already) falling foul of WP:NOR.
 * I therefore conclude that the editors need help to write encyclopedic content, possibly including a more appropriate title and help to prune the refs. Help rather than delete, I think. JMWt (talk) 21:25, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Can someone explain why this should not be a section on Joik? It seems to me that a lot of the page is making (in my view quite interesting) comments about the social practice rather than the art project, would these not be better found there?JMWt (talk) 14:21, 13 November 2015 (UTC)


 * I think they're already found there, aren't they? User:80m6an made some edits to the Joik article last week, expanding the oral tradition and fairy angles. If there's anything left in the Winged Ones article that isn't mentioned in the joiking article, I agree it should be moved across.
 * This is clearly an editor working in good faith who's misunderstood the problem tags applied to their article, but if Winged Ones is not (yet) a notable album, which it doesn't seem to be on current sources, the article should be moved to a draft page. --McGeddon (talk) 17:11, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi there

Thank for the work you all put into this. I think I will get off this bus now. I have some experience from different editing interactions from other contexts. I have understanding for that there can be some temperature now and then. What seems characteristic with this one is that me as a newbie in this, the editors involved Manxruler and McGeddon in combination with how the tags are formulated becomes a confusing experience. At first there seemed to be some minor issues, and I started to fix them. Then more and more issues appeared. As I tried to edit the text new ones came up. One example is that the article was originally written in a pretty metaphoric prose that is usual for this type of articles, but then it was tagged that the prose should be more referencial, so I did, and here we are. As I already mentioned, this hasnt been a total waste of time for me, as I can use this experience in teaching my class. But now I do not want to go further in this. I leave you in peace and love. Thank you for your patience. I hope the tags I put on top of the article will make it disappear. All the best.

I was planning to write more on the joik page. The few edits that I did, gives just some fragments. But I want to gett off this bus. I would like to delete the edits that I made there, so that things are as tidy as they were before I entered this. How should I do that? Is there a page that directs how to do that.

80m6an (talk) 23:44, 13 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Sigh, that's very unfortunate. Unfortunately I think you are unlikely to be teaching your class an accurate understanding of how the wikipedia culture works because you don't appear to understand it yourself. That said, if you felt under attack when doing your best to write a useful article, then I can only apologise and assure you that it is not about you. There is certainly space here for discussion of the cultural identity of the Sámi, you've just written about it in a way that doesn't really work here. I don't know how else to explain it to you. JMWt (talk) 16:03, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

I have added a short section on the project on Joik. Unfortunately whilst many of the references on Yoiking_with_the_Winged_Ones are interesting, few are directly relevant. I am sure that 80m6an feels the whole thing has been a complete car-crash as he/she has obviously put in a lot of effort and has been frustrated with the process of adding information to wikipedia and is not understanding what is the normal practices and checks-and-balances in place here. I only hope they come back and try again. JMWt (talk) 16:25, 14 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete

Wikipedia is a good thing. No doubt about that.

However I think that every community somehow encapsulates itself in common practises that are not so accessible to newcomers; what JMWt refers to as 'the normal practices and checks-and-balances in place here'. A world that is Kafkaesque does not have bad willed people. Everybody is doing their best. I think that is the case with current editing in Wikipedia as well. I dont find McGeddon or Manxruler ill willed. But as an experience this appears to be like being In the Hall of the Mountain King. The language is twisted like what 'topic' refers to. The logic is twisted. Manxruler asks for adjustment of prose and asks for references. When that is done, then new issues appear. McGeddon is contradicting him/herself. FuriouslySerene takes the full step and uses a language that reminds very much about troll-talk when commenting the article, but that is perhaps also common practise here.

In an afterthought it would have saved me for work and effort if I had a disclaimer when I got the automatic invitation to write an article about the project. This has not been a waste of time. It has rather been an interesting experience. I am satisefied with that. I am sorry for that I don't have the time to be a part of this any more.

Please. Could me and my text leave this hall in peace?

I promise. I wont enter your premises again.

80m6an (talk) 21:28, 14 November 2015 (UTC)

Hi There.

Now I see that the article is taken down. Thank you so much for helping me out of this. All the Best.

80m6an (talk) 11:10, 17 November 2015 (UTC)


 * The article is still there for now - since discussion is currently split on whether to keep it, we should let this Articles For Deletion discussion run its course before deleting anything.
 * Wikipedia is a project maintained by volunteers around the world who help out where they can and don't necessarily coordinate - what you see as a Kafkaesque bureaucracy of "new issues" being brought forth when others are resolved is just different editors seeing different problems. Some editors can be a bit terse, but most will be happy to answer questions if you aren't sure what a template is asking you to fix, or what a policy means. (I'm not sure where you think I've contradicted myself, but feel free to ask me if you want anything I've said clarified.) --McGeddon (talk) 11:25, 17 November 2015 (UTC)

Dear Manxruler Dear McGeddon Dear FuriouslySerene Dear JMWt

I appriciate your involvement in this wonderful effort to make Wikipedia what it is.

I have had my share here now, and I am kindly asking you if you could assist me to get out of this. Is there a simple good and peaceful way for me to get myself and my text out of this?

80m6an (talk) 14:22, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
 * I understand, but nobody can delete content until there is consensus and this process has run the course. You can stop contributing any time you like. JMWt (talk) 14:24, 19 November 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: There have been few !votes and not much consensus. Relisting. Mr. Guye (talk) 01:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mr. Guye (talk) 01:34, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment. If the sources listed in "Mentions in mass media" are employed as references for the article, in place of the mostly irrelevant refs used as of now, then I think this could be an article to keep. There are some useful things in "Mentions in mass media", including a review. Manxruler (talk) 23:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Okay, what have we got that meets WP:NALBUM?
 * Ávvir article: an article about Somby and his Juoiddá Joavdan album which may or may not be the album which this article is about. If it is this album, and if the article is not just an interview "where the musician or ensemble talks about the recording" then this sounds like a good source.
 * NRK Sápmi radio: you say this "appears to be a portrait interview", so can't be used to established notability as it is a source "where the musician or ensemble talks about the recording"
 * BBC's Late Junction "played a track and mentioned the record": can't be used, as this is not a significant depth of coverage
 * Nordlys article: seems to be paywalled so I can't check it
 * Ávvir review: autotranslating it twice it seems to be a track-by-track review, so seems a good source.
 * So in the absence of further sources it comes down to what the Nordlys article says, and whether first Ávvir article is an interview or not. (I've autotranslated it via the tool you suggested - there's a lot of first-person sentences, but I can't tell if they're attributed to the journalist or to Ánde Somby.) What do we think? --McGeddon (talk) 09:25, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * 1. As for the Ávvir article, a Google (got a Facebook hit on 29 October 2015) seems to support that Juoiddá Joavdan is this album. A re-reading of the Sami to Norwegian translation seems to indicate that this is an interview with Somby, with the artist talking about a record and the process of creating it. He likes the LP format, and to have the record in question produced as an LP, he had to go to London to attain the assistance of Chris Watson. I'd say, this article is "an interview "where the musician or ensemble talks about the recording"".
 * 2. The NRK Sápmi radio ref seems to be a portrait interview.
 * 3. I agree with regards to Late Junction.
 * 4. I would guess that this might be a review (I could visit a library and have a look at the newspaper in question).
 * 5. This is indeed a good source. It's a proper review, using the Norwegian dice throw system (it got a throw of 3.4).
 * So, thus far there is one good source. Does that suffice? Manxruler (talk) 16:06, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * As for 4., I went to the library yesterday and had a look at the paper version of the newspaper in question. The review (or what it may be) wasn't in the paper version, so I guess it's only an online article. Will try and see if I can gain access to the online article somehow. Manxruler (talk) 22:34, 1 December 2015 (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.