Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/LouFest

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The result was withdrawn by nominator. Safiel (talk) 01:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

LouFest

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

Seems be very borderline on WP:Notability so I will at least take this to AfD and see what happens. There doesn't seem to be a whole lot of guidance on Wikipedia as to the particular subject of music festivals in general. Looking at both the articles in existence and also at the AfD's for articles that have previously been deleted, I don't see any reasonable guide. My personal view is that notability is local only and this is also a recently established festival, so I will go with Delete. Safiel (talk) 19:02, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree that this is a bit of a grey area. I eventually declined speedy on the grounds that there was at least some coverage, and have advised the author to find something a bit more widespread. The list of bands seems pretty well blue linked, so there should be something. We'll see. Peridon (talk) 20:01, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm involved in that I have responded to the author's request at WP:FEED, and have added sources to the article. One of the more in-depth articles about it is this in St. Louis Post-Dispatch, which, according to it's Wikipedia article, is one of the largest newspapers in Midwestern USA, this is hardly a minor local newspaper. The GNG does not stipulate that the reliable sources be national or international. Including this source, which I added since this nom, and the other sources of the article, I think that this article may meet the GNG. Quasi human | Talk 20:33, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have added 2 additional references of national prominence. this one from National Public Radio and this one from the CBS affiliate station in St. Louis. Rtoma321 (talk) 18:09, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please let me know what else i can do to satisfy the GNG guidelines and establish the necessary notability. Rtoma321 (talk) 02:35, 8 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Missouri-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 02:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 02:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 02:19, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm inclining to a Keep on the grounds that St Louis newspapers are rather wider in coverage than (for example) The Downby-in-the-Swamp Wringer, local being a relative term in newspapers, and also because of the number of blue links in the list. Notability doesn't cascade, but this many bands wouldn't play at a village fete. Peridon (talk) 19:38, 11 August 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, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:20, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Peridon and my comment above. Quasi human | Talk 08:43, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Temporary keep Question mark on wp:notabiliity. Lack of attendance figures in the article or even on the event's web site raises questions. Also the fact that so much much of the article talks about tangents rather than directly about the topic also raises questions. But the article is only a week old and so shortages in the article do not mean shortages in the subject. Putting more encyclopedic content about the subject in the article would make notability less mysterious/questioned. Give the editors a few months to flesh it out. North8000 (talk) 14:39, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Can I add to that that the 2011 festival will apparently be happening in a couple of weeks, it is possible that more coverage will arise in its aftermath (admittedly a WP:CRYSTAL argument). I will try to improve the article to address those concerns. I have had a look at the references in the article, and can find no mention of attendance figures, except for a vague mention in the St. Louis Jewish Light ref, which says that attendance was "solid, but maybe not quite what [the organisers] hoped for".[1] Attendance numbers would be nice, but seem to be unavailable at the moment. Quasi human | Talk 15:34, 12 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Changing to provisional keep and withdrawing current nomination Clearly is not going to be a consensus to delete here. Will wait for the 2011 LouFest to occur and may renominate if a serious question of notability still exists. Safiel (talk) 01:08, 16 August 2011 (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.