Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The yarrow

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. (X! · talk) · @264 · 05:20, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The yarrow[edit]

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

Small unsigned band with no significant coverage, Prod removed without explenation. Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 13:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further comment by nominator

There appears to a lot of mixed feelings about this band, I would like to point out to !voters considering joining in this discussion and those who've already commented and may not have noticed that although The Yarrow have been published by 3 publications i.e Daily Herald, Deseret News and The Salt Lake Tribune, these are all publications local to the bands area (Utah) and appear to be somewhat trivial considering this is an unsigned band who (so far) has not been acknowledged outside of their local area. If a consensus cannot be achieved here I'll most likely be taking this to WP:RFC. Thanks, Jeffrey Mall (talk • contribs) - 18:54, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The "significant coverage" provided within the article passes WP:RS and is enough to pass WP:MUSIC. -- Blanchardb -^{Me•MyEars•MyMouth}- timed 15:37, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 16:50, 1 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW (Talk) 23:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. The "significant coverage" alluded to by Mr. Blanchardb amounts to "charity event X will feature events such as blah, foo, bar, and live music, played by bands such as Yuk, Dum, Boo, and The Yarrow". If that passes for significant coverage, then I need to work on articles for all my highschool garage bands. Badger Drink (talk) 23:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Adding that other "significant coverage" amounts to puff pieces from local newspapers, focusing more on the novelty aspect of a local band than actual notable merit. Again, if these pass for reliable sources, then I have a handful of high school garage bands to add, complete with citations from the local weekly paper. Badger Drink (talk) 00:01, 9 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 12:42, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP , but the article needs to be set up better with more and more prominent references. I think that the article page is "note worthy" and should stay on the condiction that work be done to it. (Milestokilo (talk) 12:55, 15 February 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Please keep in mind that noteworthiness and Wikipedia's concept of notability are two different things. — Rankiri (talk) 18:18, 15 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. The article's sourcing is scarce and inconclusive, but I think it may be adequate for passing the minimum requirements of WP:N. When in doubt, don't delete. — Rankiri (talk) 18:18, 15 February 2010 (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.