[WikiEN-l] The a7 speedy

Thu Dec 15 13:09:53 UTC 2005

On 12/15/05, Mark Gallagher <m.g.gallagher at 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