Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Noise and Confusion

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. Fritzpoll (talk) 15:40, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Noise and Confusion[edit]

Noise and Confusion (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

A concert in '05 that, although it was a success, apparently did not become a yearly event (as was hoped). A 'one-off' event. Many GHits show for it, but most are blogs, news releases, Fan 'WOW's or flicker photos. Not a Notable ongoing event. An Orphan with no apparent Refs Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 01:32, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • So are we a going to have a list of an Article about every concert that ever taken place? I am sure that there is loads of RS's for every concert that has ever been, but having a RS isnt an indication of the event itself being WP:Notable. Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 03:19, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure, why not? Gigs has presented significant coverage in reliable secondary sources. What part of WP:N backs up your argument? --Explodicle (T/C) 16:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. The "ongoing event" requirement does not appear in WP:MUSIC. A Google search proves nothing. The sources presented above by Gigs meet WP:N. Orphandom is not reason for deletion. --Explodicle (T/C) 16:58, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • You are correct insofar as it does not mention any "ongoing event" requirement because WP:Music is about musicians, ensembles composers, lyricists, Albums, singles and songs. This Article is about a single Concert, not about the bands that played there, their music or albums. I do not believe WP:Music applies. The cited sources at most state Who played Where, How many people attended, that Tickets were £35 and their hope for a yearly event (pretty darn close to advertising). Honestly, I don't think any of the non-blog cites are substantive. That is why I sought input from a AFD. Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 23:07, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • So how exactly is this "one-off event" point relevant? On a seperate note regarding the content of sources, it looks like the Wessex Scene Online is the most useful one, since that one is a review of the actual mini-festival after it took place. IMHO, Ryan Bailey goes into plenty of depth about the concert itself. --Explodicle (T/C) 13:21, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Because Wikipedia is not a news outlet. "Routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article." I consider Concert reviews the same as sports coverage. Every concert garners a review of the performance somewhere, just like every game gets its play & score reported somewhere. I admit it is a good review of their performance, what impact did the event have? Are you implying that the bands performance makes the event notable? Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 18:38, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's a useful analogy. Here's how I see it:
Minor events (delete or redirect) Medium events (merge) Major events (seperate article)
High school sports College/pro games One-of-a-kind games (Superbowl, All-star games)
Garage band performances Concerts with 1-2 performers Festivals
What makes this event notable is that it was a festival, not just a concert. We've already got plenty of articles about festivals, and if we're going to create a new inclusion criterion it should be discussed at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music) and applied evenly to all of them. --Explodicle (T/C) 19:59, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Festivals are yearly events as the link you pointed out (list of music festivals) shows. Every Article it points to is a reoccurring event. Noise and Confusion was a single event, so it does not qualify as a festival, it was a single concert. You are the one whom asked why the "one-off event" point was important. I believe you have just answered your own question. Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 21:16, 15 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I cannot find any sources that define a festival as "yearly events" [5][6] but the Wessex Scene article does call this a "mini festival". The Echo Project is on the list and like this one, was intended to be annual but never made it past the first year. --Explodicle (T/C) 13:27, 16 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep WP:notpaper We're not running out of space. This was a notable event, with many notable bands there, plenty of news coverage, and I would imagine a fair number of people attending. Having numbers of those attending would be a good thing to add to the article. Dream Focus 00:14, 13 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • But that's the question isn't it, What makes this concert Notable? It wasn't the first/last concert of any of these bands that played, it wasnt the first/last concert ever played at the venue, it set no Guinness records, the number of attendees, it does not matter what big number that is. It was a single non-notable event, that should be treated as a News report, just like all the trivial news print/advertising it received (remember that WP:N reminds us The number and nature of reliable sources needed varies depending on the depth of coverage). We are not talking about the Notable bands that played there, as that does not make the event Notable. The Wiki is not a Directory of every concert that has ever happened. Those concerts that do have articles have something that makes them Notable, it may be unfortunate, but this one does not. Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 07:17, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Read the review the event got in major newspapers. [7] That alone makes it quite notable. Not every movie ever made, nor album ever recorded, needs their own article, nor every concert. Just the ones that are clearly notable. Dream Focus 13:12, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Not really ... "Presumed" means that substantive coverage in reliable sources establishes a presumption, not a guarantee, that a subject is suitable for inclusion. Just because the event got a standard concert review in a paper does not make it notable. I ask the question again: What makes this concert Notable? We cannot rely on concert reviews to make events notable, the event itself must be notable in the first place. (Seems a review focuses on the bands performance, which might fall under WP:inherited but I'm not going to work that angle. I still say the event itself is not notable.) Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 17:45, 14 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak keep. Music festivals are big business and this one had notable talent, reliable sources also likely cover this in droves with all manner of concert reviews. It would technically pass sourcing and GNG. The bigger issue - which is a clean-up issue - is to help build this into a reasonable article actually worth reading. Certainly it was no Woodstock we We Are The World bit but likely was significant in some key respects. Was there a concert DVD? Give some meat to the story or your friends will take away your pint and send you packing. -- Banjeboi 09:00, 16 June 2009 (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/Noise_and_Confusion&oldid=1138167288"