Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Acro-brats

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 was no consensus. - Daniel.Bryant 10:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Acro-brats

The Acro-brats (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Procedural nomination for de-prodded, re-prodded article. Original nomination text follows.

This may not qualify for a CSD A7, but there is no way that it comes close to meeting Wikipedia:Notability (music) ... songs appearing in "bonus tracks" (i.e., not "featured") on video games is their only claim to notability, and that's not on the list of criteria ... redlinked Record Label is another indication of lack of notability ... no WP:V citations whatsoever. —72.75.126.37 (talk • contribs) 22:10, 23 January 2007 (UTC) Flyingtoaster1337 09:06, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep - What are you talking about? The notability page says nothing about "bonus tracks" being differentiated, the songs are clearly featured in the game, which is what the criteria is. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by hoponpop69 (talk • contribs).
    • Quoting from WP:MUSIC ... "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show. (But if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that page.)" --72.75.104.44 15:33, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
    • But there's a difference between a game based around music, and a tv theme song. Because a tv theme has one group, and a game like guitar hero has so many, it would be impractical to list band information on all the groups on the one guitar hero page. You can't compare the two.Hoponpop69 01:36, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
      • Actually, it's pretty easy to compare ... being the theme for a network television show is notable (although still not notable enough for an article if it is the only claim), while being one of four dozen songs selected for a video game (which does not provide even a fraction of the exposure, since people must pay money in order to hear it) is nowhere close to being notable ... if there are some WP:RS citations, then they should have been in the article, because lack of WP:V is why it is in AfD now. --72.75.104.44 19:57, 30 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Keep- I wouldn't underplay the importance of being an extra song in guitar hero. Yes it is extra but it's not just a fun little thing to be played in the background of the actual game play, it's a continuation of the actual game play in a significant way. To compare it to songs in other games where music isn't the focus would be unfair. Aside from that they are a real band that plays real shows and has two real albums avalible for purchase, one of which is on the very real iTunes music store. Don't get me wrong it's not that hard to get on the iTunes store, but it does take a certain amount of notability. This isn't just some band passing out demos to their five friends. You can find reviews of their music from legitimate sources. So yes they aren't the "theme song" of guitar hero per say, but they aren't only guitar hero. And techincally they are the song played on the title screen of the game so... 63.139.168.233 06:53, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
    • Keep - Seems very arbitrary to want to delete this entry. A gigging band with two albums available for purchase at multiple outlets and they're featured prominently in two successful video games. Why wouldn't this qualify? 68.236.94.234 15:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, TigerShark 14:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep for all the above mentioned reasons. Mathmo Talk 17:05, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep The very suggestion of deleting this article, based on the reasons given, needs to be called into question when not all of the GH bands are receiving the same scrutiny. In fact, it smacks of a personal attack/vendetta against this band. The entry for Graveyard BBQ, for example, isn't being challenged and let's examine the facts: they have only one album released and available for purchase as opposed to The Acro-brats' two CDs, Graveyard BBQ has been on only one of the Guitar Hero games while The Acro-brats have been on both; The Acro-brats have played more shows, and so on and so on. To me there's no question of whether or not this entry is valid. The only question is what was the motivation behind the individual who called it into question in the first place. 24.218.220.18 20:12, 8 February 2007 (UTC)
    • Weak delete: The band COULD be notable for the GH work, but the page itself is entirely unsourced. If they're notable, surely there's more that could be said about this band then brief mentions of their two albums and a brief trivia note. The 'personal vendetta' idea is taking this way too personally; I have no personal interest in this article, I just think it fails Wikipedia's policies. If there's a less notable article that shouldn't be there, then nominate it for AfD as well (see also: WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS.) Tiakalla 05:09, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep - GH makes them notable by my judgment. --Falcorian (talk) 00:16, 11 February 2007 (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.
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../a/r/t/Wikipedia%7EArticles_for_deletion_The_Acro-brats_ada3.html"