Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Her Chariot Awaits

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 redirect to Mike Orlando. There is consensus that the band isn't ready for a standalone article yet, though it could very well be in the future, and that Mike Orlando was the most suitable target. Mackensen (talk) 15:36, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Her Chariot Awaits[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)

Does not meet WP:GNG or WP:MUSICBIO. Possibly WP:TOOSOON. I've found a lot of blogs and zines that do not meet WP:RS that mention them, but nothing to meet our standards. See the AllMusic entry: https://www.allmusic.com/artist/her-chariot-awaits-mn0003913239 Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:08, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:08, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - It is too soon for this new band for now. They got some buzz in the metal genre press because they have two previously notable members, but in their own right they have not yet received the necessary coverage to indicate notability. All that can be found are some softball introductory interviews and reprinted press releases. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:53, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Too soon indeed. Not notable. Yes, they are signed to a notable label and they have two previously notable members, but the sourcing is trash, the only site that indicates notability is Metal Storm, the rest is garbage (Youtube videos as sources...I have no words). The blank Allmusic page does not contribute to notability either. And like Doomsdayer said, all that can be found are interviews and press releases. Let's wait for that album and if it gets reviews from notable media, the article can be kept. But for now, I certainly think this article is too soon. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 15:47, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Wait for that album? Their debut already released to crickets. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:08, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for pointing out the youtube thing. It's seems obvious from a reliability perspective, but when that is how official music videos are often released now... It seems I should have used a media citation to directly cite the official music videos rather than the youtube webpage they were released on. Deathagent (talk)
Keep https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability_(music)#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles states that "6. Is an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians" can be sufficient notability. Keeping the page allows anyone looking up Her Chariot Awaits to find more information on the notable members and their other projects. In addition, they have released one album (of the required two for notability) on a major label. I would also point out that since most music stores were closed and quarantines were (and some still) in place when the album released and the normal touring, etc has not been possible, that should be taken into account when considering availability of information in regards to notability guidelines. Deathagent (talk)
- MUSICBIO does not state that they are notable if they meet a specific criteria, they may be notable. There's not enough sourced content to support an article. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:58, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - "Their debut already released to crickets" - that's funny. Sorry, I overlooked the release date. I am aware May 22 is gone now. :) Still, let's wait, maybe they will get some coverage in the near future. But until then, delete. This is not a notable band - yet. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 19:48, 16 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Deathagent, and (indirectly) per WP:ATD-R. The group contains two notable members, so if a standalone article is not yet appropriate (and other people here have a point with that), we should redirect instead. The question is - where? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:06, 23 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: No WP:SIGCOV, pure and simple. That there is no clear redirect target is why a redirect is not appropriate, per WP:XY. Ravenswing 11:51, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is against policy, which states, "A page can be blanked and redirected if there is a suitable page to redirect to, and if the resulting redirect is not inappropriate." In this case, there are two suitable pages to redirect to, and the resulting redirect is appropriate. I have removed that explanatory supplement, as it is contradicted by core policy. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:49, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see a policy conflict here: ATD-R states that articles can be redirected if the redirect is not inappropriate, while XY is about one type of redirect that is commonly considered inappropriate. The point of XY, at least in the broad interpretation that's relevant here, is that if a redirect can equally well point to several articles, then instead of arbitrarily choosing one as the target, we can delete the redirect and so enable readers searching for the term to directly reach the search results, which will display all the relevant articles. This can work here, as the two articles that mention the band are displayed at the top of the results; in the meantime, the article can be draftified in anticipation of further coverage that would establish notability. The draft will also show up in the search results, so that's probably the solution that maximises reader utility. An alternative is to redirect to the article that has the most relevant content, but that will be an arbitrary choice that comes with the undesirable implication that we're judging one of the members of the band as more significant than the other. – Uanfala (talk) 16:20, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nor do I -- Uanfala covered it well -- and it's no surprise that your unilateral attempt to remove XY (an explanatory supplement that's been up for over six years) was reverted. Ravenswing 05:05, 26 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 15:27, 29 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep for now Musicians and bands are known for their work, and this band gets coverage in industry media outlets. Also we should look for WP:ATD as Ritchie has pointed out above. Wm335td (talk) 19:08, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Mike Orlando, as the band's founder. WP:TOOSOON based on current media coverage. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:51, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
As per Timtempleton above - merge and redirect to founder in absence of band-specific SIGCOV. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 14:20, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Notable musicians can make bands notable, and notable bands can make musicians notable, so I'm generally skeptical of groups of articles that seem to rely on each other's notability. What I'm more confused about is how WPMUSIC considers, for lack of a better term, "the metal press". I've seen around Wikipedia for years that we seem to have a ton of metal band/album articles about which nothing is written outside of magazines, blogs, websites, etc. dedicated to metal. I haven't seen deference for niche publishing like that for any other musical genre (maybe classical?). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 15:27, 12 September 2020 (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.