Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/HubbaBubbas
- 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. Randykitty (talk) 16:52, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
HubbaBubbas[edit]
- HubbaBubbas (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The musicians discussed in this article do not meet the criteria for notability in music as outlined in Wikipedia's guidelines. All reliable source coverage listed is local. WP:BAND and WP:MUSICBIO criteria are not met. The article is biased, it is written as though it were trying to advertise for or promote the musicians discussed within. The musicians themselves have no strong claim and very little regional/international renown if at all. InspectorMikeChin (talk) 00:34, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
| The following articles were initially listed in this discussion, and some, but not all have been later nominated separately. Some of these articles have not been renominated, and the nominator has implied withdrawal per their removal of content on this page in this edit. At this time, this discussion only pertains to the HubbaBubbas article. North America1000 10:50, 1 June 2018 (UTC) |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
I am also nominating the following pages because the musicians/bands discussed therein likewise cannot be considered notable, for the same reason as the aforementioned. In addition, some of these articles are stubs.
|
- Procedural close. Per Squeamish Ossifrage's prior comments [1]; the bundling here is inappropriate, as the only thing that's evidently in common among these subjects is Singapore. And the nominator's removal of Squeamish's comments [2] violates WP:TPO. If the nominator wants to nominate these separately the first step is to close this one. --Arxiloxos (talk) 04:31, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Agree with this and recommend a temp topic ban for whoever deleted that comment. Someone who deletes other comments at AFD is unstable.Egaoblai (talk) 08:18, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Comment – Below is the restored content that the nominator removed from this page in this edit (see Revision history for more information). North America1000 10:40, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Procedural close. These are the worst kind of bundled nominations. Most of these entries are not directly related, other than thematically (as Singaporean musicians). So this omnibus AFD requires us to search for potential missed sources for a whole slate of different subjects. On top of that, there's a real possibility that some of these musicians will be better represented in Chinese-language media than in immediately obvious English-language sources. And make no mistake, I'm fairly sure that there is at least one notable subject here. The Sam Willows have quite a bit of media coverage; now, some of that is quasi-independent sources that include interviews, but this is a bylined article about the band (and their then-new album) from The Jakarta Post. This is one of those articles that contains an interview, but is not exclusively an interview; whether or not it is an appropriate source is somewhat secondary to the fact that it's a Singaporean media outlet describing the band as "arguably Singapore's most popular band". And so forth. Needless to say, there are a LOT of sources available. And that makes me think that WP:BEFORE wasn't done on everything in this list, either. I'm sure this was all well-intentioned, but these omnibus AFDs are almost always trainwrecks unless they have a very narrow, clearly-defined scope. This doesn't. I'm not saying all of these articles should be retained. I don't know. But let's not try to figure that out this way? Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 02:57, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Thanks for the feedback. I have removed the Sam Willows case from above, and I will make the necessary edits so that they will be as separate nominations rather than related. — Preceding unsigned comment added by InspectorMikeChin (talk • contribs) 04:19, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:01, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Singapore-related deletion discussions. North America1000 11:01, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep The nominator is nominating articles based on a false understanding of the guidelines given that local coverage does not preclude a band being notable. Some of the nominations also appear to be indiscriminate. The coverage in any case is national and significant - [3][4][5] and would qualify under WP:BAND. Hzh (talk) 11:46, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Procedural Close/Keep All - As recommended elsewhere by User:Arxiloxos and others, I support a quick close of all recent AfDs by User:InspectorMikeChin due to incorrect procedures and misunderstanding of notability guidelines. This includes the following: Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Lorong_Boys, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/The_Steve_McQueens, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Gentle_Bones, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Shigga_Shay, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Orchestra_of_the_Music_Makers, Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/HubbaBubbas. Later, each can be inspected for notability if desired by other editors. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 18:27, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
- Delete - In response to Hzh, the coverage does not qualify under WP:BAND on several accounts, if you check the WP:BAND section, the qualifying conditions include the following which the nominated article does not qualify: (3) Has had a record certified gold or higher in at least one country. (6) Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians, or is a musician who has been a reasonably prominent member of two or more independently notable ensembles.This should be adapted appropriately for musical genre; for example, having performed two lead roles at major opera houses. Note that this criterion needs to be interpreted with caution, as there have been instances where this criterion was cited in a WP:CIRCULAR manner to create a self-fulfilling notability loop (e.g. musicians who were "notable" only for having been in two bands, of which one or both were "notable" only because those musicians had been in them.) (8) Has won or been nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award. Based on what is written in the nominated article, the musician(s) discussed within do not seem to qualify for the above three clauses for notability. Please feel free to correct if I am wrong — Preceding unsigned comment added by DouglasRosieFan10 (talk • contribs)
- This editor has only made four edits, all at this AFD Atlantic306 (talk) 18:14, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- Notability is established by meeting (generally speaking) at least one of the criteria at WP:BAND; a musician need not meet them all to be notable. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 04:12, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:16, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 12:16, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
- Keep as per the multiple reliable sources identified by Hzh which enable a pass of criteria 1 of WP:NMUSIC (only one criteria needed and it probably passes other criteria as well) and passes WP:GNG, thanks Atlantic306 (talk) 18:14, 15 June 2018 (UTC)
- 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.