Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Coast to Coast (McDonald's Jazz Band LP)

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. By definition, as this has been on AFD for just short of a month. Stifle (talk) 19:57, 28 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Coast to Coast (McDonald's Jazz Band LP)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Liner notes and Youtube videos aren't enough to establish notability based on the requirements of WP:NALBUMS Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 02:56, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I would normally agree with this question of notability if it was a standard, commercially released LP and had ample oportunity for peer review. I have now added review/documentation information, as much as is out there with a google book search.

1. The liner notes are done by Leonard Feather who was notoriously picky about doing liner notes and how he did them. Feather himself dates back to the days of being a big advocate of Charlie Parker and jazz musicians of the Be-bop and post bebop era.

2. There is a unique set of young musicians that came through this 'jazz program' sponsored by McDonald's corporation; it was one of kind that will never come again. This LP was a unique set of up and coming 'jazz greats' who had been able to achieve a very good first start on this band. The playing on the LP surpasses a great deal of professional level groups; it honestly does not take a music critic to even hear that.

3. Curnow had to place the group in a specific set of concerts and oportunities to perform (or record) and this was as per McDonalds, the McDonalds Marching Band, and the school schedules of the high school kids involved. This is a musical equivalant of being a McDonalds All American Basketball player or footbell player and then eventually going onto the the Los Angeles Lakers or the Green Bay Packers. Greg Gisbert alone (off this LP) is one of the most sought after jazz trumpeters living in New York; Harry Allen sits at this level too. The recording documents some unique music from a once in a lifetime set of kids. Jcooper1 (talk) 06:28, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 29 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – GorillaWarfare (talk) 05:56, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Keep – per: Cadence Magazine, Review by Bob Rusch. Jan 1, 1985 Volume 11, page 87. Perhaps merge to a new article titled, McDonald's All-American High School Jazz Band, for which significant coverage in reliable sources is available, per this search. Northamerica1000^(talk) 06:37, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If an article is done on the group itself then why would this not be a derivative or subpage of a page on the McDonald's jazz group? I am not sure why this would need to be merged rather than kept and then used as a sub-page. Yes, by the logic used there would be need to be an article on the group itself that this might 'flow' from. Jcooper1 (talk) 14:26, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Through different word combinations and other search engines I found:

JAZZ REVIEW: ALL-AMERICANS PUT IT TOGETHER, The Los Angeles Times, Apr 17, 1984. Part VI, Page 1
ASBDA Journal, Volume 57, Ammark Pub. Co., 1987. page 30

Jcooper1 (talk) 15:21, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or Merge The article on the record seems okay to keep, based on published reviews showing notability. It would also make sense to merge to an article on the band itself, which is actually the more interesting and important topic. Borock (talk) 19:35, 6 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant ^(talk) 05:56, 12 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, or perhaps merge to a new article on the band as suggested by User:Northamerica1000. One article isn't sufficient to establish WP:N ("Multiple sources are generally expected," WP:GNG). The album isn't notable in its own right, so it can't be kept as a "derivative or subpage" of a new article on the band ("An album requires its own notability, and that notability is not inherited and requires independent evidence," WP:NALBUMS). Fails WP:GNG, WP:NALBUMS. Yappy2bhere (talk) 19:55, 17 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Relisting for the final time just to ensure that there's no mistake in judging the consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Wifione ^Message 11:51, 20 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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.