Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Legacy Five

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 keep. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:07, 27 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Legacy Five[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Seems to fail WP:GNG and WP:MUSICBIO. Sources are associated or primary or routine coverage in the lone souther gospel magazine out there. The awards and nominations are not well recognized. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:42, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This group won a GMA Dove Award last October for Southern Gospel Album of the Year, according to The Tennessean. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:58, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I addressed that in my nomination. It's not a prestigious award. If they had won the Grammy for Southern Gospel Album of the Year, that might have been different, but it would be like an audio engineer winning for best editing. Minor awards like this do not usually garner much press and that is the case here. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:03, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - It is a very prestigious award in Gospel and Christian music across multiple genres. As well as coverage in Christian sources, these awards are covered by WKRN-TV, Billboard and The Tennessean. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:17, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - Here is an article with significant coverage of Legacy Five in the Valdosta Daily Times. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:27, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - (edit conflict) The Dove Award for best artist, best album, best new artist, best rock album, best rock performance are prestigious. Most of the rest are also-rans. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:28, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      - Legacy Five got the award for best album in 2020. Prestigious, in your words. LucasBitencourt (talk) 01:39, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        In descending order of prestige: Pop/Contemporary Album went to Tauren Wells. Worship Album OTY went to Hillsong Worship. Rock/Contemporary Album OTY went to Skillet (band), Rap/Hip Hop Album OTY went to Social Club Misfits. There are a number of other minor awards and Legacy Five received the minor award of Southern Gospel Album OTY. I have been involved in Christian music since 1977. At that time, Southern Gospel was a bit more prominent than it is today. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:33, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        Who came up with that "descending order of prestige"? If it was not the Dove Awards organization themselves, it's clearly not really something. You may see it that way, but one view alone does not immediately mean something is true. A group's relevance should not be seen by the prestige of their award, anyways. It is a Dove Award for best southern gospel album, period. That does say a lot. LucasBitencourt (talk) 12:28, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        I don't understand the logic behind that "descending order of prestige". If we were talking about, say, the Grammy Awards, we might say that "Album of the Year" is more prestigious than "Best Rock Album", "Best R&B Album", or "Best Country Album", since albums in all genres are eligible to compete for Album of the Year. But I doubt we would try to rank the prestige of Best Rock Album, Best R&B Album, and Best Country Album relative to each other; they're presumably all about equally prestigious relative to each other. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        
        One thing further, just because their album earned them a Dove, does not mean that they are immediately notable. MUSICBIO states that they may be notable if, and then lists reasons that may contribute to it. If we can't find significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, and that is not routine, we have to assume that they are currently not notable and delete the article. I could not find sources to support notability. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:47, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        They are not "immediately" notable. They have been so since their formation, in 2000. Again, mere relevance is not up to us to decide. The southern gospel field has had Legacy Five at very high standards for the past 20 years. LucasBitencourt (talk) 12:28, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      - "Legacy Five joins Georgians concert" seems like they are promoting a local concert so it's WP:ROUTINE coverage. Sorry. I should have linked that part of the guideline in my nomination. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:30, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This is no matter for deletion. I apologize, but claiming the GMA Dove Awards are not "well recognized" shows lack of knowledge on the topic. Not knowing it does not mean it's not important. It's obviously not a Grammy, yet it's widely known as one of (if not the) most respected awards in all of Gospel Music. It's specific for that genre. Remember: this article was written over 10 years ago, by fans and for fans. It was never meant to please the ego of the members of the group, who may not even know the article exists. This is meant to help those who want further information on the group. Rather than having to look all over the internet, they will find here all they need, through the work of several editors who have dedicated their time and effort to improve the article down the years. LucasBitencourt (talk) 01:10, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- To clarify, I should have stated that the award they received was minor, not that the Dove Awards themselves are insignificant. As for looking all over the Internet, if we can't find significant coverage on the Internet or elsewhere, it's not our job to create such here. AllMusic does not even recognize their importance: https://www.allmusic.com/artist/legacy-five-mn0000232193 and that's their purpose for existing. None of their albums are reviewed there. None have ratings alone, and only one has a user rating. That clearly means something. If people want to find out about Gospel Music, I suspect that they will be going to https://www.singingnews.com or https://www.sgnscoops.com/. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - It is not up to us, two people arguing on Wikipedia, to decide whether an award is relevant. When you talk about music, including all genres, all singers, all albums, all awards etc, it's obvious a southern gospel quartet will seem irrelevant. We must talk about their specific field. It's gospel music alone we're talking about. In that field, Legacy Five has proved their relevance time after time. Gospel magazines and websites feature them all the time. This cannot come down to one person's opinion on relevance. There's an entire field that must be taken into consideration. The website you mentioned, AllMusic.com, does not provide much info on several gospel groups, by the way. I've checked many. Even the Gaither Vocal Band, perhaps the best-known gospel group ever, does not have much said about them in there. Does that mean they are not relevant?! Of course not. It's a matter of adding the info in there. I may do it myself later. LucasBitencourt (talk) 12:28, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep -- I suppose this might come down to how one views the Dove Awards, but in the absence of insider knowledge I think that award speaks a lot more strongly to notability in this area than Walter does. I'm not particular swayed by the argument that "Southern Gospel was a bit more prominent [in decades past] than it is today", as the Doves are still the premiere award for the genre. Combine this with the other coverage, and I think this group passes MUSICBIO. Alyo (chat·edits) 04:05, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- The Dove Awards are notable, for its more notable awards, but this minor Dove is not. Feel free to prove me wrong by showing all of the coverage that the award garnered. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:36, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - The award garnered coverage from gospel media, which you don't seem to consider relevant. Again, that's the whole point: relevance cannot come down to one person's opinion. It is relevant for those who consume this kind of content. LucasBitencourt (talk) 12:28, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Appears an edit war and extended discussion on the article's Talk page led to this AfD nomination. Just an observation when a decision is being made here. David notMD (talk) 08:27, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, thank you. Until the moment I decided to question my fellow editor's choices for the article, it did not seem irrelevant at all. This deletion is looking like a more personal than reasonable decision. Please, take that into consideration. LucasBitencourt (talk) 12:28, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Let's try not to cast aspersions on the motivations of our fellow editors. While I would disagree with the nomination for deletion, Walter has made a lot of good points and if the article is kept, it will have to be severely pruned because music blogs and Facebook pages are not considered reliable sources. Alyo (chat·edits) 13:54, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - I apologize for that. The heat of the moment, you know. I will not delete my comment for the sake of the discussion, but I do take back what I said. As for the Facebook and blog posts, I've added them mainly because they were posted by either the administration of the group (as in official statements on Facebook saying a member has left the group, for example) or by writers well-known in the field. They can be easily replaced by more reliable sources. I commit myself to doing that later. LucasBitencourt (talk) 14:05, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment From Wikipedia's article on how to save an article from deletion: "On Wikipedia, the general inclusion threshold is whether the subject is notable enough for at least two people to have written something substantive (more than just a mention) about that subject that has been published in a reliable source." Just last night, I've added several citations that prove the group's relevance. They are reliable, and very well-known on the gospel field. Again, relevance is not up to one person, but to one entire community. The Southern Gospel field recognizes the importance of Legacy Five. One may check every single source I've added to the article. Some of them may not seem very professional, but most are definitely reliable and well known in the Southern Gospel Music industry. LucasBitencourt (talk) 12:41, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This seems like a case of overzealous deletion. Wikipedia advises against it. Remember the principle of assuming good faith: the article was written over 10 years ago, not by a member of the group, but by fans, and for fans. It is not simply promoting the group. It is a place where people can find reliable information about the kind of music they enjoy. As I said, the group's notability is not questionable. They are relevant in their field. If a person does not know that field, or does not consider it relevant, that does not necessarily mean they are right. Please, take the entire Southern Gospel community into consideration. LucasBitencourt (talk) 12:55, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If lack of sources or redundancy of components on the page is the actual problem, we can solve it. I will personally do my best to improve the article as much as I can. This is precisely what I have been doing for at least the past five years. Take a look at the page's history. I have done nothing but improve the article, and I intend to keep doing so. Let's solve the problems by talking and trying to reach common ground. This is definitely not a case for delection. LucasBitencourt (talk) 12:58, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Check the article's analysis on Pageviews. The article itself has excellent daily averages and pageviews for a Southern Gospel quartet. As I've said before, they are best-knwon in their field. That alone has brought a lot of attention to the Wikipedia article. Again: not up to opinion. It's numbers, it's facts. Please, take that into consideration, too. LucasBitencourt (talk) 13:40, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've deleted all references from Facebook posts, and added citations from more reliable sources, as suggested by @User:Alyo. I had used Facebook posts because that is where Legacy Five's administration posts their official statements when a member leaves or joins the group, or when they release a new album, for example. Those references are no longer mentioned in the article. I hope that shows the article is based on quality references and that, rather than simply deleting it, we can work on it. LucasBitencourt (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Unlike the nomination states, there seem to be multiple southern gospel magazines, also, several unassociated newspapers, such as https://www.carolinagatewayonline.com/content/life-constant-tweak-legacy-five and https://www.codyenterprise.com/news/people/article_c35c1db2-a784-11e2-b609-001a4bcf887a.html. They're a music group, we can't expect them to make the front page of the Washington Post, but non-trivial coverage in multiple "trade" papers and local newspapers meet WP:GNG. General request to User:LucasBitencourt, though - please relax, and don't post so much! This isn't in danger! Have a nice cup of tea! (Or, I guess, given the context, I guess you'd prefer a nice tall glass of cold sweet tea?) The Keeps here are overwhelming, but I couldn't initially even see that among all your Comments. --GRuban (talk) 18:03, 19 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for the vote and the tip, @GRuban. This is the first time I'm part of a deletion process, so I may be overreacting a little :) A hot cup of tea would be nice, nonetheless! LucasBitencourt (talk) 18:11, 19 February 2021 (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.