Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tree City (group)

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 delete. While the group obviously has many passionate fans, a number of whom have shown up here to argue the article should be kept, the policy and guideline-based arguments around notability and reliable secondary sources were strongly in favor of deletion. Jayjg ^(talk) 01:06, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tree City (group)[edit]

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

Non-notable band..I couldn't find any notable sources that weren't about Tree City USA CTJF83 05:35, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely noteworthy band, they're extremely influential in the area, if you type in related albums/events into a google about them, there are at least two pages worth of facts. Also 20 links, where at least 15 are notable sources including Michigan Daily and Annarbor.com, also it follows guildines of being on radio stations for interviews and performances by radio stations that also are "worthy" of a wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Overcastskies (talk • contribs) 06:10, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- How do they meet WP:BAND, please provide reliable sources that show they meet WP:GNG CTJF83 06:12, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep. Some examples of significant coverage: Michigan Daily, AnnArbor.com, AnnArbor.com, AnnArbor.com, plus RapReviews. Mostly local coverage but I'd err on the side of keeping.--Michig (talk) 06:58, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- rapreviews doesn't look reliable to me....others look fine, like I said, it was hard for me to find sources about the band and not a city with trees. CTJF83 07:02, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I have declined speedy delete on this as there are plenty of references, it will take more time for you people to check them out and make a thoughtful decision. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 12:28, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

One of the more atrocious examples of A7 tagging.--Michig (talk) 13:18, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, seems to have at best local notability, I'm not convinced that this meets WP:BAND. NawlinWiki (talk) 14:44, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:44, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's obvious that this page is justified in not one, but THREE of the ways listed. Not only does this meet the requirement that states that a band or group must meet one of the criteria listed, it significantly exceeds it. This is no longer a civilized debate over whether this is a legitimate page anymore, it's a disgrace to Wikipedia. There are much more important things to focus your attention on right now than arguing against submitting a page that's obviously legitimate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.118.117.193 (talk) 20:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well here is where you provide such details as to why it is legitimate as you say. CTJF83 21:25, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I guess now would be the perfect time for me to reiterate everything the author of this article has already mentioned in his defense.

This group meets the following criteria for musicians and ensembles: 1) They appear in a news article featured in the Ann Arbor News on Annarbor.com 7) They are one of the most prominent (If not the most prominent) group in the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti Hip-Hop scene 11) They are currently in the song rotation of many radio stations, most notably WCBN and WIDR All of these criteria are backed up by one or more reliable references. This page is not trivial nor is it incorrectly posted. The claim for the deletion of this article is entirely ungrounded and unnecessary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.118.117.193 (talk) 21:42, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All they have is local coverage. Being played on local radio stations doesn't mean anything. My local stations always play songs from local bands, doesn't mean they are notable. CTJF83 21:44, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Despite you disagreeing with the claim to #11, they still irrefutably meet the criteria for #1 and #7. On top of that, #7 specifically mentions the fact that a local band DOES in fact qualify for this criteria. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.118.117.193 (talk) 21:54, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All the sources look trivial to me, so 1 looks out to me, and there is no evidence they are prominent in their music type, so 7 looks out to me too. Please indent one more than the previous post by putting one extra colon then the previous post, thanks, CTJF83 22:00, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I spend my time making music, not posting on Wikipedia- so excuse me if my presentation is not immaculate...

Since the formation of Tree City in early 2006, we have performed at hundreds of events, for thousands of people. These shows have taken place in dozens of venues throughout the state of Michigan and the greater Midwest. This year, we have plans to tour in Kansas, Nebraska, and a few other states.

We have worked with internationally acclaimed artists such as 14KT, Kadence, and Georgia Anne Muldrow. In addition, we have collaborated with numerous producers from across the globe, including Oznoh (who lives and works in Spain), Blaze One (who lives and works in Canada), and Arkiv (who lives and works in Australia).

Last week, my music video for "Classically Trained feat. Silas Green", which currently has 4,186 views on Vimeo (http://vimeo.com/7777910), was screened in the 49th annual Ann Arbor Film Festival (http://aafilmfest.org/49/index.php/films/classically_trained/)... one of the oldest and most prestigious film festivals in North America. It was presented alongside the work of renowned musicians such as Flying Lotus, Broken Bells, and El Guincho.

We also happen to have 1,018 fans on our Facebook artist page right now (http://facebook.com/TreeCityHipHop). Anyone involved in the Ann Arbor/Ypsilanti hip-hop scene will tell you that we have made a significant impact on the musical & cultural landscape in the area, and continue to do so. In fact, we have facilitated the emergence of a younger generation of groups and artists, who have admittedly been influenced by us. Not that sources like these are "reputable", but if you use logic, you can put the pieces together.

I hope you understand where I am coming from. We have made it this far on sweat and ceaseless toil, so I refuse to let you attempt to take away from our accomplishments to boost your status or ego. If this page gets deleted, it will merely be recreated in a year or two. We will only continue to do our work and rise in stature, because we devoted our lives to this cause many years ago. Thank you.

-Evan Haywood AKA Clavius Crates —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.40.198.191 (talk) 07:12, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're not providing reliable 3rd party sources on why the band is notable. You could have 10 million views on Vimeo/Youtube, 10 million Facebook/twitter followers/fans, and it doesn't mean anything. Also, the page will just be protected then so you can't create it. Are you also saying this page was created with a WP:COI? CTJF83 11:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I explained, I can only speak from my non-Wikipedia perspective. I am a musician, not a journalist. My sources may not be credible to you, but they are in the real world. I had nothing to do with the creation or maintenance of this page, nor will I be involved in the future. In fact, I have never posted a single thing on Wikipedia... cross-check my IP address if you wish. A friend forwarded this thread to me and I felt that I should express my opinion. However, I am not interested in squabbling with you. I have spoken my mind, and there is really nothing left to say. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.40.198.191 (talk) 16:14, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

First off, I made the page. No one related to the group made it. Second off, you could have 10 millions views on vimeo/youtube and get a wikipedia page. Check Rebecca Black page "The music video uploaded to YouTube has received over 64 million views, as of March 29, 2011." I guess it's just a higher number. Basically, we've supported links to articles and such that support the WP:Band or whatever it's called. Take the time to read these articles and you'll understand the importance of this group, be it local it still follows the guideline. If not, hopefully other people have the sense to take the time to do the research, before decided to keep or delete this page. As the previous commenter said I'm done squabbling. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Overcastskies (talk • contribs) 00:25, 30 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete – Lacks sufficient coverage to meet Wikipeidia notability criteria. A little local coverage that mentions the croup in passing, but nothing that supports WP:MUSIC. Here is a breakdown of the references in the article.:

1-University of Michigan at Ann Arbor newspaper article-perhaps the closest thing to a viable secondary reference; however, I do not believe a source is enough to support notability. If more of these could be found. I could change my opinion.

2-Is just a show listing

3-YouTube Vid

4-Blog

5-Brief mention of group

6-Local coverage

7-Review of CD

8-Brief show listing

9-Mixtape review

10-Blog

11-Brief song listing

12-Group review

13-Local coverage not about group

14-Local coverage about former group member

15-Local coverage about group member

16-YouTube Vid

17-Not about group

18-Song listing

19-Song listing

20-Song listing

21-Song listing

ttonyb (talk) 17:05, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - You've obviously not reviewed the sources at all, considering how inaccurate your brief and unintelligible blurbs supposedly meant to provide insight into them are.

1) Is an article from a notable newspaper with numerous quotations and descriptions about the band, their music, and their impact on the local music scene.

2) An article about a then-upcoming show that specifically mentions the group, their impact on the local music scene, as well as their significant notability.

3) I have no idea why you listed this as a blog, because it's an interview.

I could continue on in this manner, but I honestly don't see the point in doing so. I suggest you confirm your research before forming an opinion and speaking out against a legitimate article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.38.185.130 (talk) 17:41, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – I can see why you were confused. The numbers were all messed up. I have updated my comments and still feel the article fails to establish notability. They may be a "legitimate group," but they appear to fail notability. ttonyb (talk) 18:19, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Forgive me for jumping into the debate here without prior participation, but I'd like to point out that the user who is the most strongly opposed to the validity of this article, User:Ctjf83, previously admitted that there were several acceptable sources near the beginning of this discussion (shown above). That fact, combined with the plethora of other valid points made in the defense of this article are more than enough to end this "debate" right now. Yet again, I apologize for intruding without prior participation, but after carefully looking over the facts it's fairly obvious that this article is valid and should no longer be threatened with deletion. Any other action is just unnecessary and, in my opinion, demeaning to the Wikipedia community as a whole. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.38.185.61 (talk) 17:50, 1 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete (regretfully): Simply no national coverage, no chart success, no national tour, only one album release and it's not on a major label. I'm not convinced that they are "the most prominent [group] of the local scene of a city". To the majority of the 'keep' !voters (not you Michig), I realize that you are new to these discussions and I know how frustrating this can be. It's nothing personal to you or the group but Wikipedia can not be a platform to promote up and coming musical acts. J04n(talk page) 12:04, 3 April 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.