Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hullabahoos

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 keep. Mailer Diablo 10:44, 24 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hullabahoos

I think this band fails WP:MUSIC - Their website claims they have released 12 albums, but there is nowt at amazon and the same result at discogs DavidHumphreys^{SPEAK TO ME}ABOUT_{THE THINGS I MESSED UP} 00:50, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

• Delete probably self produced albums. No other mainstream reference. 205.157.110.11 00:53, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Their website makes some bold comments that meet WP:MUSIC, of course, I can't verify if it's true or a simple joke. Yanksox 01:06, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment there are quite a number of reviews for albums, but I couln't be bothered counting how many, doesn't appear to be a hoax. -- Librarianofages 02:20, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Meets WP:MUSIC "Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture." -- Librarianofages 02:22, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Librarian. Baseball,Baby! ^{balls•strikes} 03:59, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Hardee67 04:05, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

• Sorry I'm not being awkward (honest!!!) but from where does the quotation "Is frequently covered in publications devoted to a notable sub-culture." come from ??? DavidHumphreys^{SPEAK TO ME}ABOUT_{THE THINGS I MESSED UP} 04:31, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

• Comment from wp:music under "other" -- Librarianofages 04:49, 19 July 2006 (UTC)

• Eeeek!! sorry missed that one DavidHumphreys^{SPEAK TO ME}ABOUT_{THE THINGS I MESSED UP} 04:51, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
  • That's only for performers outside of mass media traditions. It doesn't apply here.

• Keep per Librarianofages. Voice of Treason 07:46, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep as per Librarianofages' comments. Scorpiondollprincess 13:30, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Question - Where do you see any of these sub-culture publications/reviews? I'd like to see some reliable sources used in the article. As it is right now the article looks like original research. Wickethewok 13:43, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Comment - in my grumpier moments (like, now) i look at articles like this and almost conclude the writer wanted to get the article deleted. It's written in such a fashion as to obscure what facts there are, much less provide citations and sources for those facts. I started with the same questions of this being a hoax or not. The group does exist, but you have to search through the University of Virginia's website to find it, and apparently the 12 albums exist but were produced privately, and they aren't for sale on Amazon (wow, what a concept). This isn't helped by the fact the CARA website didn't make it easy for me to finally find award-winners from 2005, but I eventually verified that bit. I take away three lessons here: One, editors should be aware that Google and Amazon are not the final arbiters of notability, which should be judged in context of all notability requirements; Two, writers should at least read an encyclopedia before trying to write one, and; three, I'm far too grumpy to care if this article sinks or swims, and shall therefore not vote at all. Tychocat 18:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Seriously, every university has an a capella group that goes around singing The Nylons tunes and whatnot. They are always popular because they are crooners. They usually record and sell albums (which is something that anyone can do, having a publishing/distributing deal is the real business), and they are usually hired to sing all over the place. But, why is that notable? They don't usually write their own songs, even - their albums are all cover tunes. --Aguerriero (talk) 03:47, 20 July 2006 (UTC)
• Keep against nom per Librarianofages Antares33712 18:51, 21 July 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.