Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of marching bands

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. Overall consensus is to Keep as article's since been substantially improved & sourced (non-admin closure) –Davey2010^Talk 23:45, 15 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of marching bands[edit]

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

A list with one entry is not ready to appear in the encyclopedia. DePRODded by original author. PamD 17:37, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. A list of one item is not a list at all. (frankly I'd advocate for a speedy delete per WP:SNOW) -IagoQnsi (talk) 17:44, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Frankly I'd advocate for Speedy Keep. This is an obviously valid list, corresponding to large Category:Marching bands, but as a list it can include useful/interesting comparative information and it can list marching bands for which articles are needed. See wp:CLT for how categories, lists, navigation templates are complementary. I added some more bands to the list. Also note this is one of a new editor's first contributions. I've noted this before: there ought to be a prohibition against prodding or nominating articles for deletion for articles like this (by a new contributor, has potential, has not been in place very long). This can obviously be developed, and it is horrible to treat newbies this way...sorry I feel strongly about this. :) --do ncr am 18:52, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 19:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. /wiae /tlk 19:30, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Technical note I had briefly deleted the page under CSD G5 criteria (creations by banned or blocked users), however upon review Doncram's edits are substantial enough that it makes the article ineligible for G5 deletion and I have restored it.--Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 22:04, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep – The article has been expanded, so the deletion rationale atop no longer applies. The article is fully qualified per WP:NOTDUP relative to Category:Marching bands. It's also a functional navigational aid per WP:LISTPURP. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 23:29, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Probably doesn't matter at this point, given the additional work, but it's worth noting that the article creator was blocked as a sock puppet. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:49, 10 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I'd assume the subject of this standalone list is pretty undeniably notable.--Prisencolin (talk) 21:39, 10 February 2016 (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.