Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hullabahoos (2nd nomination)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-13 23:26Z

[edit] Hullabahoos (2nd nomination)

  ATTENTION!

If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on a forum, please note that this is not a majority vote, but rather a discussion to establish a consensus among Wikipedia editors on whether a page is suitable for this encyclopedia. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines to help us decide this, and deletion decisions are made on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.

Nonetheless, you are welcome to participate and express your opinions. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end.

Note: Comments by suspected single-purpose accounts can be tagged using {{subst:spa|username}}
Hullabahoos (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Non-notable college a cappella group (WP:MUSIC). Was kept in the first nomination because the group allegedly "Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture." However, the only citations (actually, there are only external links) in the article are to the group's own website, not to any independent, non-trivial, third party sources. Savidan 19:33, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

  • KEEP Although some of the external links, etc., revert back to the Hullabahoos' own website, some of them actually revert to credible sources: an article from the Kennedy Center, a Charlottesville newspaper, the RARB, etc., all suggest to me that this article is note-worthy enough to maintain. It also falls under the scope of the WikiProject University of Virginia Rebwahoo 00:50, 10 February 2007
    — Rebwahoo (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
  • KEEP I agree. GQ Senior Editor Mickey Rapkin has signed a deal to publish "Pitch Perfect", a book about the world of college a cappella that will include a year in the lives of the Hullabahoos. This is a legitimate group with a legitimate product and does certainly fall under the scope of WikiProject University of Virginia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 199.111.193.72 (talk) 07:05, 10 February 2007 (UTC).
    — 199.111.193.72 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Quarl (talk) 07:16, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:IAR in regards to WP:MUSIC. This is a niche sort of group and the places they've been invitted to perform lends notability to them. Bookings at major political conventions and the Kennedy Center shows they are elite in their genre, albeit a capella music isn't "pop" nor terribly popular. Kyaa the Catlord 13:03, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak keep per Kyaa the Catlord and [[User:Rebwahoo|Rebwahoo]. Mathmo Talk 15:44, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, yet another example of why Notability is subjective and should not be used as a criteria to keep articles off Wikipedia. I have never heard of the group, but that doesn't mean that the group should be excluded. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by DanielZimmerman (talk • contribs) 16:01, 13 February 2007 (UTC).
I will not argue with the claim that non-notable articles should be kept on Wikipedia, only point out that not a sigle keep voter has referenced an inclusion criteria at WP:MUSIC. Some of the keep voters are explicitly arguing that the group is not notable
The argument for deleting the article started off as them not being notable and that is why I included it in my argument to keep the article. As long as the article follows wp:v, wp:nor, and wp:npov there is no need for notability guidelines. DanielZimmerman 21:08, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Weak delete I'm still a little suspicious on the notability point. At any rate, cut down those irrelevant links. YechielMan 19:24, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:MUSIC (13 albums!!), but cleanup--especially for {{inappropriate tone}}. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Black Falcon (talk • contribs) 20:06, 13 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.