Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Hangovers

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. Sandstein 06:45, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] The Hangovers

The Hangovers (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

• Collegiate a cappella group. Has released a number of albums but does not otherwise appear to assert notability. I suspect the albums are self-released, as they are not listed in Amazon.com nor cdbaby.com. I reckon the group fails WP:MUSIC. Delete. Ohconfucius 03:03, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. MER-C 05:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - Refer to the previous discussion when this article was brought up for deletion. The Hangovers, although perhaps not incredibly notable outside their sphere, are certainly notable in the realm of collegiate a cappella and Cornell University music. They are certainly far more deserving of recognition than many organizations and ensembles on Wikipedia. Referring to the criteria for a musical ensemble in WP:MUSIC, I believe The Hangovers meet the following to varying degrees:
  • 4: "Has gone on an international concert tour, or a national concert tour in at least one large or medium-sized country, reported in reliable sources." - The Hangovers have toured extensively internationally and nationally for many years. Last year they toured Italy, and they will be traveling to Spain next year. Many of their performances have been for important individuals, such as their performance for South Korean President-elect Kim Dae-Jung in 1998. [1]. On their 2004 tour of Brazil, The Hangovers were shown on the Brazilian national television news, Jornal Nacional.
  • 6: "Contains at least one member who was once a part of or later joined a band that is otherwise notable" - The Hangovers spawned the Washington, D.C. a cappella ensemble, The Tone Rangers, about 20 years ago. The Tone Rangers were recently referenced in the Jennifer Aniston film, "The Break Up." [2]. Another group spawned by The Hangovers is The Breakers [3], which recently toured Malaysia. Musicians Brian Chu [4] and Alan Farouk [5] are merely two of the accomplished musical alumni of The Hangovers. Also, although not a musician, politician Alan Keyes was a member of The Hangovers.
  • 9: "Has won or placed in a major music competition." - The Hangovers have often participated in the International Championship of Collegiate A Cappella (ICCA), placing in the regional competitions. In 2001, they placed in the Mid-Atlantic semi-final competition and won recognition for "Best Entrance."
  • 1: "It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable." - I admit that the "independence" of this source can be questioned, but The Hangovers are the subject of a lengthy chapter in the book Songs From the Hill [6].
  • 10: "Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show." - The Hangovers have performed on a variety of television and radio networks. As the article mentions, they perform in a PBS documentary.
  • 7: "Has become the most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city" - The Hangovers are certainly one of the pioneering groups in collegiate a cappella, and have shaped the a cappella environment at Cornell University and likely elsewhere.

I feel it better serves the Wikipedia community to strive for a broad coverage of articles than to cut itself down to only the most notable or impressive in some broad category like "music." I recognize that some organizations use this site for blatant publicity, but I think this article serves a broader purpose. Honestly, would a general encyclopedia have incredibly awesome articles like the Back to the Future timeline? Such articles only appeal to a small niche, but they are part of what makes Wikipedia great. (To clarify, I am not a member of The Hangovers.) CREarle 07:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment Whilst you may have a point with some of the arguments, I have just re-read the article, and now believe that if we trimmed out a lot of the trivial and POV crap, pardon my French, in the earlier part, I would have not got completely turned off by the time we got to the tours section. However, I must contest some of your arguments:

"backwards notability" is highly problematic, IMHO: the Tone Rangers may have came out of the Hangovers, but the fact is that group "became" the Tone Rangers, whilst the Hangovers "became" another group on their departure. Members have drift out of it by rotation on their graduation (sic), and the Tone Rangers does not equal the Hangovers.

I do not feel that WP:MUSIC/WP:BIO defines that being placed in a regional competition is noteworthy.

Songs from the Hill is a history of the Cornell Glee Club and not the Hangovers (which is but a later offshoot), Having said that, anything less than a chapter in the book on the latter would IMO be a death knell. It is indeed correct to say that it is not independent, nor is it multiple.

By (10), I'm pretty sure the drafters didn't really mean that anyone who has publicly performed "The Theme from the Rockford Files" or "Who Are You?" be notable. They were referring, inter alia to Trevor Rabin, Stanley Clarke, Stewart Copeland, Thomas Dolby, Bobby McFerrin, who performed theme songs "for" (and not "from") films and TV shows. Ohconfucius 08:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Massive POV problems, fails WP:MUSIC and WP:BAND; being notable in their own niche doesn't make them encyclopedically notable. SkierRMH,07:20, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - POV is not a reason to delete an article (and I'm not really sure what you're referring to anyway), WP:MUSIC and WP:BAND are the same thing, and being notable in its own niche is absolutely a mark of notability for most things in most topic areas, including musical acts. JDoorjam Talk 20:36, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• It needs work but I think I have to go with keep, the stuff cited above does seem to tip the balance in favor of notability.--Dmz5 08:17, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Merge and redirect to Cornell University Glee Club. These are not notable unless they have won major competitions. Mus Musculus 16:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, for the same reasons it was kept last time the article was AfD'd. CREarle lays out a good number of reasons to keep this article. Ohconfucius: the Hangovers performed the theme song for the PBS special. It's them singing. It's not a cover. And, as ICCA is as major a competition as there is in this genre, they clearly qualify under criterion #9. They've had an original song that's been written up in college-related publications and has gotten airplay. They tour widely and have been featured in international media while touring. The article is sourced and the group has notable accomplishments. JDoorjam Talk 20:28, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• sorry to be pedantic, but nowhere in the article does it state the group "performed the theme for a PBS broadcast" - that's a new piec of informaion you've imparted; I'm not deprecating the ICCA, but the group won competition at a regional level, whilst policy states this should be a major competition. In all the other debates I've read, the consensus meaning is competition at a national level. Ohconfucius 00:10, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

• Keep - This group meets many criteria for notability, beyond that, they are a part of the oldest organization at Cornell. Some members have gone on to produce other notable groups. If there are POV problems, I suggest they get fixed instead of deleting this otherwise good article outright. Pumeleon 21:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per CREarle. This is a clearly a notable group, and if the article needs work then let that work get done. Cornell Rockey 21:32, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• ABSTAIN Normally I would be all over deleting the hell out of an article like this, but I'm too tired right now to research it to back up a delete. I will, however, be happy to edit the hell out of the article, police it to get rid of the POV crap (no, I don't apologize for that remark...it is crap), and generally clean up the article. I will remove anything that is not cited or sourced so that should help clean up the article and clarify which way this AFD should go. --Brian ^{(How am I doing?)} 23:27, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per CREarle --Xiahou 00:13, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
• Comment: Since this AfD began, a great number of references have been added to the article, including international news coverage of one of the Hangovers' tours. Further tags, most likely citing the chapter of Slon's book dedicated to the Hangovers, are likely to be added in the next twelve hours. As often happens, this has proven to be a good opportunity for article growth. I encourage those editors who have cited citation or POV issues to take the discussion to that talk page, where it can be addressed in a drive to improve the article. JDoorjam Talk 00:21, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per previous arguments, the group's history and achievements certainly merit an article. The article itself could be tightened to reflect those rather than focusing on recent and more minor issues, but should not be removed. I see it is being edited even as I write this. airbreather
• Keep (but improve) they are notable, their site is visited often according to Alexa, and they have 636 listeners on last.fm (which only represents a small percentage, not many people use last.fm) Noteworthy, keep the article! But remember NPOV! Matt 01:44, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per WP:RS and WP:NOR. Does not have any reliable secondary sources to back up any of the claims cited above as per its notability claim. It's "international tour" is a Cornell Univiersity press release, not a real third party news source. They haven't placed in ICCA, only participated and placed in much smaller local competitions. Even the keep vote above admits theres no idependent coverage of this group (i.e. non-members; not within the bubble of their university). Having been on television is not the same has having performed the theme for a television show. There is no evidence that they are any more notable than the average a capella group (i.e. having performed in front of a few famous people, been on tv once, 15th place at the local competition, paid BOCA to get on the cd). There is no way this article will ever be able to become substantial based off material that can be cited to reliable, non-trivial, secondary sources. If they only people who would want to write it (or who would be able to write it!) are members of the group, that is clearly indicative of a WP:V violation. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 04:05, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: There are already multiple non-trivial references to the Hangovers, including both a national newspaper article about them and a book with a chapter dedicated to the Hangovers. Yes, you're right: there are also university press releases, and references to the official website, but you're moving the goalposts here. Those are both reasonably reliable sources which add to the scope of the article; you're acting as though using them somehow weakens the content. I'm still not clear on the confusion about the TV show thing: they went into a studio and recorded a song, written by a member of the group, specifically for the TV show. It was then broadcast as part of the production of that show. Not incidentally, the reference to their participation in the production of that show is listed at PBS.org, which is certainly (yet another) "reliable secondary source." You are correct that they were also later on television performing, but that was an entirely different event (which seems, therefore, to further add to their notability). The article is well-referenced and only continues to get better-referenced. I'm not at all clear how deleting this article would be anything but a net loss to Wikipedia. JDoorjam Talk 04:32, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: Based on the recent edits by savidan, he's gone on a crusade to delete 20+ collegiate a cappella groups. CREarle 04:47, 18 December 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.