Talk:Phenom (rock group)/Archive 1

This is a first cut of the article. It will improve over the next few days, as more references and other stuff is added. Achitnis 16:44, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Yikes! ManuBhardwaj, I overwrote your last set of minor changes when I cut and pasted from the draft. Please reapply any changes that don't already appear in my version. Sorry about that --Achitnis 20:37, 14 April 2006 (UTC)

Notability

Who Phenom? What Phenom? I can see that the article has made a claim that this band or group or whatever is notable because it is "one of the first" groups in india to release its works on Creative Commons. This just looks like some school or college band taking itself a little more seriously than the average school or college band. Releasing its works(whose notability itself can be questioned) on Creative Commons is neither a claim to fame nor a claim to being encyclopaedic or notable. Can someone please explain more how this article is notable? Sarvagnya 04:47, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

The only thing that can be gathered about this band from reliable sources(the band's own website does not count for anything and is useless for purposes of verifiability on Wikipedia) is that the band played for may be half an hour or something at some radi station's talent hunt or something. Thats far from 'notable'. Sarvagnya 05:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

The tags explained

Non compliant: This article does not comply with WP:MUS
Original Research : The only references that count for anything among all those provided are the deccanherald and hindu ones. Maybe the dnaindia. The rest(the band's own website) dont count for anything. And the deccan herald and the hindu ones dont provide any of the information that has filled the article page except that they played at some radiocity live talent hunt or something like that.
Advertisement: In the absence of any credible explanations(though claims have been made) of notability of the band, this is a classic case of advertising. Sarvagnya 05:24, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

From WP:MUS:

• Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or the local scene of a city

Check.

• Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network.

Check.

• Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio network.

Check.

• Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture.

Check.

Your challenge is largely based on the fact that you don't know the group (or the scene in India). However, the group is nationally known, has had airplay, on-air interviews, articles written about them in not one but many national newspapers and other publications, has published their music (and the fact that they did so under a CC license does make that notable ). They may not have been the Beatles in stature, but they certainly rose way above the average college rock group scene in India.

If you would have also read the article completely, you would have noticed that the group has disbanded, and that tagging this article as an "advertisement" is a bit extreme.

If there are factual errors in the article, by all means challenge/correct them. If you can prove that the group isn't notable (by disputing the radio airplay, the media coverage, etc.) by all means do so. But by saying "The only references that count for anything among all those provided are the deccanherald and hindu ones. Maybe the dnaindia." and then questioning the notability, you basically undermined your own case. :)

Maybe you could base your case more on the basis of your own expertise in the field of rock music in India, and less on "I don't know about them, so they can't be notable"?

Thanks.

Achitnis 06:53, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

When I said that the only things that count for anything are DH and Hindu, what I meant was..."..even if we were to assume or take your word for it that they are notable, all the info in the article(the 'college years' and the other blah blah blah) is original research. If you even read what I wrote, I clearly mention DH and Hindu under Original Research not 'Notability' or something like that. As for notability, DH routinely covers even such events as annual day celebrations of high schools, fancy dress competition for kids, etc.,. That doesnt make any of those events or its participants notable or encyclopaedic. Sarvagnya 07:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Maybe you should base your case more on notable and verifiable sources than your own profound knowledge of the subject. You probably need to understand how Wikipedia works before you start editing here or even shooting your mouth off. For starters, read up on WP:OR Sarvagnya 07:33, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Please restrict yourself to using this talk page to point out which points in the article need clarification or citations, or which you classify as "original research". Your original comment was very confused and mixed up the notability and original research issues. I had replied only to the notability point.

What you should do is point out (on this talk page) text that you are "uncomfortable" with (such as "point xyz needs a citation") without going overboard just to make a point. Then leave it to other editors to look up and provide that information where needed (since you clearly can't do it, not knowing anything about the subject).

I am quite aware of Wikipedia rules (having been around since 2004), and I am actually quite well informed about the rock music world in India. I am fully aware of the needs for citations and verifiability of points, and they have been provided where available. And because of the biography nature of this article, references to the group's own website are very much acceptable.

And I'd suggest that you learn to be a little more civil while speaking to people. Gadzillions of edits on Wikipedia since March 2006 and a few on MoutShut.com years ago do *not* qualify you to use terms like "shooting your mouth off". If it is not possible for you talk in a non-aggressive, non-acrimonious tone, then back off. This is Wikipedia - please observe the rules of engagement.

You would have come across as a much easier person to deal with had you simply posted "Hi, points x, y and z need some citations to make the article more comprehensive" instead of the verbose waterfall you let loose. Wikipedia is about cooperation, not aggression and one-upmanship.

Also, please put your comments under my comments (like everyone else does on Wikipedia), and not inline. I have moved them below my original comments, please keep things that way to keep things legible and linear. Oh, and don't edit my comments.

Thanks.

Achitnis 08:37, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

In addition, I have removed the advertisement tag (totally unjustified use, this is a biography) and the Original Research tag. The latter tag *may* be justified, but you only tagged it without specifying points of concern in the talk page, as required by the tag, and off you. Note that I am not disputing your contention - I am disputing your "shooting from the hip" way of tagging stuff without following it up with the required information.

Achitnis 10:02, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

Notability

The User:achitnis claims that Phenom is notable due to the following

1. Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or the local scene of a city
2. Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network.
3. Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio network.
4. Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture.

• I want citations(proof) for all of the above.

5. Has found mention in 'notable' sources like the Deccan Herald and The Hindu.

As for the above point, I'd like to point out that merely finding mention in notable newspapers is not a claim to notability. The above newspapers print editions local specifically to Bangalore and it is not uncommon for them to cover everything from school and college fests to spiritual discourses to drunken brawls in some corner of the city to pickpockets and burglaries in their newspapers. Finding some such mention is not necessarily a claim to fame or notability on wikipedia.

Also, in the links provided by the article, it is clear that the articles by themselves are not about Phenom. The articles are about some event by a radio station or an event organised by local linux enthusiasts. It just happens that Phenom also finds a mention in those reports. And infact, the Hindu report describes the band as 'semi-pro'. - hardly a flattering accolade.

6. The band has released their work on Creative Commons

Releasing a body of work on Creative Commons is again not a claim to notablility by any stretch of imagination. I am an amateur photographer and tommorrow if I release my work under CC or something else, I dont get transformed into a 'notable' pro overnight.

My other concern is of original research, but i'll hold off on that for now. Lets get notability out of the way first. Sarvagnya 20:14, 29 September 2006 (UTC)

If you have an issue with notability, please put the issue to a test - that's what WP:AfD is for. I will respond again after you have settled the notability issue with other respondents.

In the meanwhile, you may want to rethink that noncompliant tag. {{noncompliant}} is not a replacement for {{notability}}. I am changing this to {{notability}} until your notability concerns are resolved. It also follows that many of your other concerns will automatically get resolved if the notability issue is resolved (unless you are simply going to keep picking at it until you score).

Note that I still don't like the tone and attitude you are using. Neither friendly, nor in any way cooperative. it very clearly sounds more like you want to prove your point, rather than improve the article.

Achitnis 09:59, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Please note that I dont appreciate your tone either. You tone does not suggest that you are assuming good faith. While I am aware of WP:AfD, I felt that it would be polite to ask you first about my concerns. Also since the talk page specifically mentions that you are maintaining this article and questions may be directed at you, I thought it would be in the fitness of things to take it up with you first. And the way I see it, you are still the best person to clarify things as far as this article is concerned. Anyway, I dont want this 'Notability' section also to end up like the one above. So I request you to stick to discussing my concerns on this page and take up any concerns you have about my 'tone', intentions etc., on my talk page or if you feel it necessary with an admin. On this page, I'll be glad if you would just give me evidence(citations) for points 1,2,3 and 4 listed above. Thanks. Sarvagnya 11:39, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

WP:MUS Test

Hmm... I see Achitnis and Sarvagnya have some problem here. Let me introduce two of you to each other...

To Sarvagnya: Atul Chitnis (or Achitnis) is a respectable name in Indian open-source community. Yup, he's the manager of the band, but assume good faith here. The band is no more, and this man won't make any money by writing about the band.

To Achitnis: Sarvagnya is a resepetable Wikipedian and is trying to verify the article all in good faith. He is not hell-bend on getting the article deleted; he just wants to make sure that the band is notable enough. Oh, by the way, Atul, do you remember me? I vandalized your FOSS.IN wiki. :-) utcursch | talk

Now, let's do a quick WP:MUS test to check the notability of this band:

• Has had a charted hit on any national music chart, in at least one large or medium-sized country? : No
• Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one large or medium-sized country? : No
• Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country, reported in notable and verifiable sources. : No
• Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable). : No
• Has been featured in multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers, personal blogs, etc...). : Yes (DNA, Deccan Herald, The Hindu)
• Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such. : No
• 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. : No
• Has won a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno or Mercury Music Award. : No
• Has won or placed in a major music competition. : No (IISc's VibRock and other college fests are not major competitions; FIXME: Strawberry Fields is India's most notable rock competition, but not sure if it's a "major" one by Wikipedia standards; ditto with Radio City live competition)
• Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that page.) : Yes (they've performed at FOSS.IN, Linux Bangalore, also at Freedom Jam 2005).
• Has been placed in rotation nationally by any major radio network. : No (They've been on RadioCity, but not nationally) FIXME: I rememeber that one of these guys was interviewed by WorldSpace for the show 'Spin Hits 24/7', not sure...
• Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio network. : No

I think, the band therefore meets WP:MUS (two "Yes" ...and two FIXMEs), although I think the article needs a major clean-up. Anybody has problem if I do some merciless editing here? utcursch | talk 14:02, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

LOL, yeah, I remember you Utcursch. And no, you didn't "vandalize" - you caught us with an open door, and saved us from possible vandalization.:)

Some corrections to the WP:MUS test:

* Phenom won NLS Strawberryfields in 2003 at the non-professional level ("non-pro" does not mean "bad" - it means the group was not playing for money). NLS:SF is India's single biggest rock competition, so "Has won or placed in a major music competition. :" should be Yes.

* RadioCity has played their stuff for months together. And they have been on the air continuously several times for several hours more than once.[1].

* Oh, and if you listen to the RadioCity theme these days ("dive into RadioCity") in Bangalore - guess whom you are listening to? :)

Go right ahead with the editing. Any NPOV stuff you feel needs rewording, go right ahead, if you need references to back up any statements in the article, just ask - I have lots. Especially for the CC licensing stuff and why it *does* make them notable, and how the CC world thinks so as well.

Thanks!

Achitnis 14:34, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

I agree that the band meets notability guidelines and that both editors are certainly acting in good faith. The focus here should be to improve the quality of the article (it needs work). Canderson7 ^(talk) 14:31, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Sarvagnya, I'll edit the article in a day or two. So, please wait before an WP:AfD. :-) utcursch | talk 14:40, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Gauravvaz 19:05, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm Gaurav and I played the Bass Guitar and fronted the band for most part of its active existence. I wanted to clarify a few of the claims put forth here.

* Has had a charted hit on any national music chart, in at least one large or medium-sized country?

You must note that in India, there are NO charts or ratings released for music made by Non-Commercial bands and also bands that are not signed by a music label do not count for any of the ratings.

* Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country, reported in notable and verifiable sources.

No we have not gone on a Tour but we sure have played in quite a few places around the country.

* Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).

Again ... there are no active Indie labels in India that regularly sign up and release bands' music. They have started cropping up now but they din't exist when Phenom was active.

* Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable; note that it is often most appropriate to use redirects in place of articles on side projects, early bands and such.

YES. I have now joined and have been playing for almost a year with Raghu Dixit, as part of The Raghu Dixit Project '[2]'. We have been signed up by a record label called 'Counter Culture Records' and will be releasing our debut album nationwide by next month end or so.

* Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast on a national radio network.

Does this mean that the Radio station has presence in different cities all over the country? or if the played the hour long interview we had with them in other cities in the country?

An aside

I just want to address this point, because we are going to run into it more often - whether something that is notable in India is notable by Wikipedia standards. I face dthe same issue when my own notability was challenged.

It really depends on how quickly Wikipedia becomes popular in India. One of the reasons for low edit rates from India (stated during our meeting with Jimmy Wales on last Thursday and Friday here in in Bangalore [3][4]) was that there aren't yet enough people from India contributing to Wikipedia. This affects Indian subjects being created/edited by people from within India.

It will change - give it time. Ironically, I am actually one of the people working on this here in India. [5]

Achitnis 15:24, 30 September 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Phenom rc2005.jpg

Image:Phenom rc2005.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 06:15, 6 June 2007 (UTC)