Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/DarkMateria
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was keep due to no consensus. (4 deletes and 3 keeps), even though one of the keep votes was given without reason. Sjakkalle (Check!) 12:38, 18 Jun 2005 (UTC)
[edit] DarkMateria
Fails to pass WP:MUSIC guidelines. Sarg 09:37, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep -WP:MUSIC are rough guidelines, and not meeting them exactly does not mean the article should be deleted. In particular I think DarkMateria has established itself as notable, first of all for spawning an internet phenomenon with the Picard Song and the accompanying animations/music videos others have made, but also for the unique combination of music they make which in my opinion is rather notable. Please remember Jimbo Wales comments on tolerating trivial articles if they are factual and have some inherent notability, and arent harming Wikipedia as a whole. -CunningLinguist 23:38, 5 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. The reason WP:MUSIC was created is that every band thinks they have a distinctive "sound" everyone should know about, and as for creating an "internet phenomenon"—give us a break! —Wahoofive (talk) 04:58, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- What do you mean give you a break in reference to the internet phenomenon? The Picard Song and its various animations/music videos were widely distributed and known about. I was in fact introduced to it by my Economics teacher, which shows just how wide its audience was. I dont see how this article is flagrantly non-notable. In my opinion I agree with those that beleive trivial articles should be kept and I think that when deciding what articles stay and what articles go, it is a matter of proving an article merits deletion, not proving that an article merits inclusion (assuming the article is factual). -CunningLinguist 06:33, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- What I meant is that everybody claims they have buzz on the Internet, so that's an inherently suspicious statement. I have no knowledge one way or the other. I will change my vote if you have evidence beyond your Econ teacher that this Picard Song is notable. For alleged vanity articles the burden of proof is on inclusionists to show notability. —Wahoofive (talk) 16:16, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- What do you mean give you a break in reference to the internet phenomenon? The Picard Song and its various animations/music videos were widely distributed and known about. I was in fact introduced to it by my Economics teacher, which shows just how wide its audience was. I dont see how this article is flagrantly non-notable. In my opinion I agree with those that beleive trivial articles should be kept and I think that when deciding what articles stay and what articles go, it is a matter of proving an article merits deletion, not proving that an article merits inclusion (assuming the article is factual). -CunningLinguist 06:33, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Keep. ----Da 'Sco Mon 06:45, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, the only verifiable thing in the artilce is that he made a single song that is famous on the internet --nixie 07:46, 6 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, Redirect to Final Fantasy. Radiant_* 12:23, Jun 6, 2005 (UTC)
- Keep per CunningLinguist and for making a song that is famous on the internet. Kappa 21:44, 10 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.
