Wikipedia:Deletion review/Reverend and The Makers


 * The following discussion is preserved as an Archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page.  No further edits should be made to this page.  

Reverend and The Makers
The following text was written by the article's creater, and copied from User talk:JzG --Rob 18:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Please stop deleting this page. Reverend and the Makers are an up and coming British band, gaining quite some notoriety in the British music press and in online forums. Surely the very fact that the page has been recreated so many times is testement to their popularity?

Regarding Wikipedia's WP:NMG page - it states that; "A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, hip hop crew, DJ etc) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria" - Reverend and the Makers have achieved the following criteria:

"Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country[1], reported in notable and verifiable sources." - they have toured nationally for years, and have recently been touring with Arctic Monkeys.

"Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...)." - a number of interviews with the band can be found online and in music publications.

"Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or the local scene of a city (or both, as in British hip hop); note that the subject must still meet all ordinary Wikipedia standards, including verifiability." - the band are a major proponent of what the NME call the 'New Yorkshire' scene - indeed, Wikipedia even has a New Yorkshire page, on which the Makers are already listed.

"Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show." - Their track, 'Heavyweight Champion of the World', is used by Sky TV's Soccer AM program when highlights of previous matches are shown.

Do you not think this is justifiable enough? They meet not 1, but 4 of Wikipedia's own criteria for inclusion. Captmonkey
 * Overturn and list on AfD - I can't see the article content, so I'm going by what I do see above, and I ask it be undeleted, unless there's some reason I'm unaware of.  JzG seemed to base the deletion on WP:NMG (see both user's talk pages).  You can't speedy based on WP:NMG.  That's not policy.  A claim of notability needs to be made.  If made, AFD should settle the question.  It seems, even if there wasn't a claim of notability, the author could easily add one now.  AFD will then settle whether it's sufficient and verifiable. --Rob 18:59, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 *  Overturn and list on AfD - According to the deletion log, this page was deleted for being non-notable and failing WP:NMG. Neither of these are CSD. (That said, this might be a case of WP:SNOW but I can't see the article to be sure.) --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 19:05, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I refer the hon. gentleman to criterion A7. Just zis Guy you know? 20:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * But that's not what's in the deletion log. It says non-notable, it should say "CSD A7". Non-notable is not always the same. --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 12:30, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * A7 was in the original speedy tag, not copied into the summary field for some reason. But A7 says non-notable. Just zis Guy you know? 12:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * I didn't know about this. The title of A7 appears to have changed recently. It used to be just "Unremarkable people or groups". Actually, I think the new title is somewhat misleading. (Since non-notability itself isn't a reason to speedy delete, but no claim of notability is.) --JiFish(Talk/Contrib) 13:56, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Had there been a credible claim of notability I would have AfDd it per my usual practice. I may be a rouge admin but I am quite conservative when it comes to A7 applied to apparent bandcruft. Just zis Guy you know? 14:37, 27 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Overturn and put up on AfD From what I've seen above, I think it would meet at least one criteria listed on WP:NMG. It may not, but without the article there, there's hardly a way of knowing. Darquis 19:31, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Overturn and put up on AfD based on the info given, if it checks out, this may be notable enough, and agree that this probably is not a CsD based on music related criteria. However if it (or a substantially similar article under a different name) was previously AfD'ed then it qualifies for CsD under recreation of previously deleted content... was that the case?  + + Lar: t/c 19:25, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Overturn, but relist only if those sources don't check out initially. The NME claim appears to check out, so...--badlydrawnjeff (WP:MEMES?) 19:28, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, I am the author of the offending page. I've been asked to cite sources for my claims above, so, here I am. I'm confused - it's a simple, non-offensive page about a band who are about to break through in the UK! Anyhow, to the points raised:
 * "Have gone on tour" - - here, buy tickets for their forthcoming National UK tour. Or, perhaps you've seen them on the current crazy sell out (tickets going for £200 on eBay) Arctic Monkeys tour as the support act? Here's a BBC review of a gig they did in February -  - they even say "This band (Reverend and the Makers) are the ones to watch".
 * "Been written about online and offline" - Seriously, do a Google search - you'll turn up half a dozen interviews from different sites. The NME said this about them in a recent review, 'Trust us, before long you will worship at the altar of the Reverend. Hallelujah'.
 * "Become a prominent representative of a notable style or local scene" - the existing, unmolested, Wikipedia article for the burgeoning New Yorkshire musical scene already lists them. The NME coined this term, and used the Makers as an example of one of the bands in the 'scene'. Think back to 'scenes' like Britpop and NWONW.
 * "Has performed music for media that is notable" - I'll admit that this is a little tenous, but their track, "Heavyweight Champion Of The World" is being used by the Sky TV production, Soccer AM, as backing music to replays of the previous weeks football action.
 * Anyways, they're a band that are just on the cusp of good things - this is no garage band playing gigs in deserted pubs - they just played to several thousand people just last night in Hull. It's up to you guys! :) Captmonkey 19:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Regarding you statement "Seriously, do a Google search".  Actually, when you make the article, you should have done that, and cited every single reliable source you could.  Never assume people will look up missing information, outside the article.  It's basically up to you to include relevant material.  So, if/when the article is undeleted, be sure to include it.  While anybody can do a google search, not all results are useful.  Some are just promotional and self-written.  It's really up to the article author, to pick out the high quality ones, and include them in the article.  While I criticized the deletion of this article, I am certain, that if the article had the relevant information, it would never have been deleted. --Rob 20:00, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Don't care overmuch, happy to have it listed on AfD. More effort seems to have gone into pleading the case than went into the article, which is always a bit frustrating. But do note again the comment made by the creator that the band are about to break through in the UK.  That was how I read it, too.  Bands which are "about to break through" very often don't. Just zis Guy you know? 20:37, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Undelete add the cites. Put on AfD if it still looks dodgy. They're not the only ones to leave the cites for later and get deleted in between. Perhaps the author should have read Why should I care? first - an easy mistake to make. Stephen B Streater 22:10, 26 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Having spot-checked the deleted versions, this certainly seems to have qualified under speedy-delete criterion A7 since the article itself made no claim to notability that I found. Send it to AFD as a disputed speedy-deletion but I'm skeptical about its chances.  Some real evidence will have to be presented that this is more than the garage band that the article made it seem.  Remember that we don't cover bands that are about to break thru - we cover bands that have broken thru.  Rossami (talk) 00:45, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Actually, a number of criteria in WP:MUSIC are written specifically to include bands lacking mainstream commercial success. Notability<>fame+sales, necessarily.  --Rob 04:07, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * ...but there's no rush. I fully agree with you, but I think the "notability without commercial impact" thing needs to be evaluated by the good old fashioned "test of time". --kingboyk 07:13, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * "there's no rush" is not what a wiki is about (that's more of a Britanica approach). Also, the test we will evaluate the article by is WP:MUSIC, which, if the creator's claims can be substantiated, the article will pass.  --Rob 07:37, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Disagree, sorry. There are differing opinions of what wiki is about. Being up-to-the-second up-to-date is not necessarily one of them. --kingboyk 07:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Request: If admins wish to wait the full week before removing "protected deleted" status, can I suggest its undeleted immediately, but to a user-subpage of the creator.  That way, he can fix it up properly (maybe get some feedback), before its put back in article space, hopefully avoiding the need for re-deletion.  There's no point in AFD voters wasting their time evaluating the old version, if its going to be substantially changed shortly.    --Rob 04:17, 27 April 2006 (UTC)
 * List at AFD (where I shall recommend Delete) As a popular music buff, I'm usually quite lenient on band articles. However, having the luxury of being able to look at the article, it's main claim to notability is that the band are touring as support to the currently very fashionable Arctic Monkeys. They don't even have a record deal. I think at a bare minimum a new band ought to have a record deal to be notable. (There are of course exceptions, such as when the members are already notable, or historical bands who became notable through later activities of their members or some other reasons.) --kingboyk 18:01, 28 April 2006 (UTC) Changed from keep deleted to relist. --kingboyk 07:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * This is DRV, not AFD. So, the issue is whether the article qualified for a speedy under a7.  A claim was made.  If you contest it, you should take up the matter on an AFD.  You said "it's main claim to notability is...".  Hence, you have conceded the speedy was invalid, since you conceded a claim was made.  The rest of your sentence will be relevant at the AFD.  It is fundamentally wrong for admins to ignore policy, and remove content, without community consensus.    --Rob 07:30, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, you got me on this one. I was thinking about this in bed last night (sad I know!) and I realised I'd snookered myself somewhat on this point. You're absolutely right. I wouldn't have speedy deleted it. I will therefore amend my recommendation. --kingboyk 07:47, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Undelete. No need to relist as even the original version of the article indicates that the group passes WP:MUSIC by virtue of its verifiable national tour gigs.  Those who have speedy-deleted this article in the past don't seem to have conducted any research (which would have confirmed the assertion of notability in the original article) but rather assumed that their own ignorance was an indication that the article should be deleted.  Articles about bands should not in general be speedy deleted where they contain such assertions of notability, Nor should they be listed for deletion where, as in this case, research turns up evidence to confirm the assertion. The Reverend and his band have supported sellout gigs featuring the hugely popular Sheffield band Arctic Monkeys  (BBC) and have been confirmed as main support band for the Monkeys' upcoming tour  (NME), and you can buy tickets for some of their April-June gigs online through ticketweb. --Tony Sidaway 14:41, 29 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Question: Why is this page still protected deleted?  Even if the page warranted deletion under a7, it never should have been protected (especially with more then a month since the previous deletion).  A core principal of Wikipedia is people can create articles immediately, *without* a prior bureaucratic approval process.  Unless there is attack content, copyvio, or a strong AFD consensus that no article under the name should exist; protection should not be used in cases such as this.  When using protection, one should always ask, what is so harmful that we need protection from.  Many newbies confronted with such protection, will simply give up, and go away, which is quite unfortunate.  If people want an encyclopedia they can't edit, they can go visit Britanica. --Rob 18:39, 2 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Consensus to restore and relist on AFD. OK, will do. Sjakkalle (Check!)  06:40, 9 May 2006 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an Archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page, such as the current discussion page. No further edits should be made to this page.