On 12/15/05, Mark Gallagher <m.g.gallagher(a)student.canberra.edu.au> wrote:
G'day Mgm,
<snip>
WP:MUSIC isn't the be-all and end-all. A band may
be included because
it's very unusual, or culturally significant, or any number of reasons
I'm too tired to think of right now.
For instance, I believe we have an article on a Melbourne twee pop
outfit called Clag. Now, Clag only released one album ... but for a
time there they were *very* popular in Melbourne's indie music scene.
Their music is also extremely unusual: about as twee as twee pop can get
without becoming nursery rhymes. Also, it's really good. But that's
neither here nor there.
I'd oppose deletion of this band's article (I will be most hurt if
anyone takes the opposite view solely because of WP:BEANS). However,
there are thousands of bands out there with the same or less of a
profile who are, and should be, deleted. WP:MUSIC is *generally* a good
guideline.
There was a new user on AfD recently who opposed deletion of every band
iff WP:MUSIC was mentioned by the nominator or a voter (if a nominator
attempts to argue for deletion without mentiong WP:MUSIC, by the way,
there's often something wrong). I am not nearly so extreme. But just
because a band fails to meet the "notability guidelines" doesn't mean we
should delete it. It's not a bad argument for doing so, admittedly.
--
Mark Gallagher
"What? I can't hear you, I've got a banana on my head!"
- Danger Mouse
Like allmusic the number of albums available is just one of the
criteria it could fit. A band doesn't need to fit all the criteria
listed. One or 2 of them is enough. If the claim they're extremely
popular can be referenced that, together with "their music is unusual"
should make quite a case for keeping it. Unusual music would make them
important to their genre right?
Mgm