Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hnat Khotkevych Ukrainian Bandurist Ensemble

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Plenty of weak "keep" !votes, but Pkravchenko's detailed argument carries its weight. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:50, 27 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hnat Khotkevych Ukrainian Bandurist Ensemble[edit]

Hnat Khotkevych Ukrainian Bandurist Ensemble (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:BAND. nothing in gnews for something that existed since 1964. gbooks reveals WP mirrors. LibStar (talk) 01:55, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Strong keep. Important historical ensemble, NOT A BAND. Plenty non-English sources.--Galassi (talk) 11:35, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
fails WP:GNG in any case. Please provide evidence of sources in third party coverage. LibStar (talk) 16:09, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong keep. Good grief! I've seen some crazy suggestions for "delete" but this one really takes the biscuit. Of course you cannot delete this article. They are a majorly important band. However, that's not to say that the article doesn't need more references. I would suggest that someone needs to add a few "insert references" throughout the article. But as for the article itself, it is of course a keep! --Tris2000 (talk) 12:27, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
good grief, you have provided zero evidence of actual third party sources to establish notability. Your argument says WP:ITSNOTABLE. LibStar (talk) 16:12, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:00, 18 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep sources more likely from google books than news. –SJ+ 19:09, 19 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've checked gbooks and it reveals WP mirrors. You have not demonstrated significant third party coverage to establish notability. LibStar (talk) 02:20, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Strong keep Made significant contribution to ethnic music in Australia, and to Ukrainian ethnic music of the diaspora. Bandurist (talk) 02:57, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
please provide third party sources to prove this. LibStar (talk) 03:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Keep. Google News or Books cannot be a difining factor. A lot of material is found on paper.--Galassi (talk) 03:21, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
you cannot !vote twice. LibStar (talk) 03:38, 20 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Ukraine-related deletion discussions. —Pkravchenko (talk) 14:22, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: Again, another nomination by User:LibStar showing poor judgment. I strongly oppose this nomination on these grounds:

  1. As evidenced previously the nominator has no knowledge or competency in this area, and not having a basic command of Ukrainian makes it impossible for him to do effective internet searches to justify his nominations (or to properly assess the significance of a Ukrainian-related subject). As suggested by another editor — User:LibStar "should be required to contact someone who knows the language in the proper Wikiproject before trying to delete an article".
  2. The nominator has improperly claimed as a 'fact' that not having 'hits' on Google News or Google Books = "failing WP:BAND". This is a misleading statement and a very 'original' interpretation of WP policies like WP:GOOGLEHITS, where it only states that using tools like gbooks and gnews is "more likely to return reliable sources" compared to a default Google web search. The consistent misuse by User:LibStar of 'gnews' as a justification for deletion is irresponsible and not in accordance with any WP policy. In fact WP:GSNR states "Google News reprints large swathes of material which may or may not be reliable, may or may not be relevant to the subject of the article, and may or may not still be there by the time the AFD closes."
  3. Wikipedia deletions policy and etiquette (WP:BEFORE) requires that a {{notability}} or {{verification needed}} or other appropriate tag should be placed, instead of a deletion notice as a first step. I quote: "If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion." (WP:ATD. Unfortunately, User:LibStar does not even bother notifying the creator/main contributor of the article, thus preventing anyone the opportunity to improve the article, before it is potentially deleted without their knowledge.

Someone competent in the Ukrainian language would find, just using the internet, that the Hnat Khotkevych Ukrainian Bandurist Ensemble was notable enough to be mentioned in:

  1. Ukrainian online news:
  2. The international Bandura journal (issued in New York):
  3. These journals, mostly available in full from the Vernadsky National Library of Ukraine:

NOTE: all of the above references also mention the ensemble's founder — Hryhory Bazhul (another article that User:LibStar is attempting to delete). Also the above references do not include instances of the ensemble when it was conducted by Peter Deriashnyj — some of these other instances are included here (another page User:LibStar tried to delete. The above references are all found via searching the internet, and do not include paper publications. --Pkravchenko (talk) 14:22, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Do these Ukrainian articles cover the ensemble as per "Significant coverage" means that sources address the subject directly in detail WP:SIGCOV or are they about Hnat Khotkevych? can you please convert these references to inline citations. currently the article completely lacks inline citations. LibStar (talk) 05:15, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Question: this ensemble has existed in Australia since 1964, how come not any coverage in Australian press. all Australian located organisations would be held to same standard. LibStar (talk) 05:20, 25 March 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, King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 10:16, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep per Pkravchenko. Conversion of sources to in-line citations is not sufficient reason to delete an article. Poor coverage by general Australian media in not unknown for non-Anglo-Celtic organisations. Local migrant newspapers are not well represented in preserved documents and so mention by on-line media is hardly surprising. There is no requirement for the ensembles to be covered by on-line Australian press as long as it is widely covered per se. Pkravchenko has provided more than sufficient such coverage.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:34, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am unable to verify a lot of uncited statements in the article. Secondly some of the sources supplied by P.kravchenko may be passing mentions. Why is this ensemble not even covered significantly in local migrant papers? You're assuming there is local coverage when none has been provided. Presuming this ensemble had performed in Australia since 1964 why can't even get a passing mention in any Australian media. LibStar (talk) 02:39, 27 March 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Hnat_Khotkevych_Ukrainian_Bandurist_Ensemble&oldid=1137912839"