Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Classic Rock Society
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
You have new messages (last change).
- 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 of the debate was no consensus. W.marsh 13:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Classic Rock Society
I prodded for lack of assertion of notability. Prod removed with comment that hosting notable artists confers notability. I dissagree; notability is not gained by association with notable people. Fails WP:ORG Eluchil404 20:13, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. The organisation has done nothing, in and of itself, to be notable. Or, certainly, nothing that is discussed in the article. —C.Fred (talk) 20:52, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Scores 24,000 ghits, mentioned in particular on a large number of band sites. Well known within progressive rock circles, an important sub-genre within rock music. Particularly notable for its annual awards which have been won by bands such as Magenta and Karnataka. Lancsalot 21:21, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. Ugh, this is as awful as I expected, but having Yes-man Rick Wakeman as their preznit gives them strong claim to notability. Are they incorporated in any way? ~ trialsanderrors 22:00, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. Association with notable individuals does not make the group notable. If Rick Wakeman sang in a church choir, the choir wouldn't be notable. If he released an album with them that hit the charts, now the choir is notable. —C.Fred (talk) 22:41, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Based on what? ~ trialsanderrors 22:48, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- In the hypothetical, they'd meet the WP:MUSIC criteria by charting an album. The Classic Rock Society has not released an album, so they can't qualify there. They're an organization, they have no press coverage or other outside publication, so I don't see them as notable per WP:ORG. —C.Fred (talk) 22:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- A proposed guideline, so it's ok to disagree then. They got a bimonthly glossy, probably full of Roger Dean art. Notable? I'm still interested if they are a incorporated or just a "society". Btw, no google news items. ~ trialsanderrors 00:27, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
- In the hypothetical, they'd meet the WP:MUSIC criteria by charting an album. The Classic Rock Society has not released an album, so they can't qualify there. They're an organization, they have no press coverage or other outside publication, so I don't see them as notable per WP:ORG. —C.Fred (talk) 22:57, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Based on what? ~ trialsanderrors 22:48, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. Association with notable individuals does not make the group notable. If Rick Wakeman sang in a church choir, the choir wouldn't be notable. If he released an album with them that hit the charts, now the choir is notable. —C.Fred (talk) 22:41, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Keep as a notable organisation within their field. Capitalistroadster 23:27, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Simply not well known. And Rick Wakeman will sign up for anything... -- GWO
- keep please the organisation is notable in their field Yuckfoo 06:28, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
- 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.
