Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kim Deanda

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 of the debate was DELETE. JIP | Talk 08:43, 17 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Kim Deanda

The article had a Wikipedia:Proposed deletion tag that was removed then replaced and then tagged with a db tag that was also removed. Listing here. No feelings on way or the other. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 13:00, 11 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Weak Keep Album created with 'I AM' moved about 10,000 units, and subsequently she opened for Lionel Lovett on his American shows. Ruby 14:05, 11 February 2006 (UTC) Changing vote to Strong Delete because I don't like legal threats, especially from purported Christians when Jesus said don't do it (see talk page). Ruby 17:10, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. I don't see her satisfying WP:BIO or WP:NMG. PJM 14:32, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete as barely notable. Talk about namedropping and linkfarming! I'd reconsider if all the crap were cut from this article. But I doubt she'd be any more notable then. Prove me wrong, someone. -- Krash (Talk) 16:15, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Huston, we DO have a problem, she qualifies for WP:NMG, under Wiki's criteria, which is the guideline, and check discussion board, on the issue of comprehension and correct recitation of the actual article, already one major error in review by the second comment. The article is based on common encyclopedic style. The WP:NMG is the guideline and reference to the airplay, units sold, and cultural contribution of Breakfast With Amy and the number of offshoots in the genre, leading edge in thier genre specifically influencing that ahead of others. The rest on the discussion page. User:amplat 16:18, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Who or what is "Huston" and why is the voicing of opinions different than your own a "problem"? PJM 17:42, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
Please read the third paragraph of WP:NMG -- those are guidelines meant to help facilitate discussion, not a replacement for consensus. And I don't see which of the guidelines she meets anyway. Tuf-Kat 02:27, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
    • I don't see how the artist, or any of her projects, meets any of the specific criteria at WP:MUSIC (WP:NMG). The article says that the first Breakfast with Amy album sold over 10,000 copies in a few weeks, but doesn't say how many it eventually sold. In any event, it has never been certified gold by the Recording Industry Association of America, which would require sales of 500,000 copies. Delete unless verifiable evidence that the subject meets WP:MUSIC is produced. --Metropolitan90 01:42, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete unless this article can be properly sourced in a way that establishes notability. The name only returns 12 non-unique Google hits [1] after discounting Wikipedia mirrors. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 17:34, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete. Non-notable at this time, for reasons already stated above. — TheKMantalk 17:38, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. The subject of the article's above-mentioned legal threat (and an assertion of notability) has been moved to this discussion's talk page. —Cleared as filed. 17:40, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete No references for any of the claims is a big problem. It simply does not assert meeting WP:BIO or WP:NMG in any coherent way. Claims to be considered "legendary" - by whom? Ties to other bands and musicians are confusing and unreferenced, there's some name dropping but it's just "compared to" or "attended a lecture by", and at best "worked with" - in what capacity exactly? Only person contributing content seems to be the subject of the article, which is often cause for serious concern. Ultimately this needs some references to be cited, if they answer my questions, that might change my mind. --W.marsh 17:55, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, more or less per Ruby. Removing articles about people who are critical of Wikipedia, or threaten to sue it, is a form of censorship. This incoherent, quasi-literate tantrum isn't a good reason to delete an article about a minimally notable musician, although some reference needs to be added to the article about the different names the musician has reportedly been credited under (since that's messing up the verifiability issues). Monicasdude 17:56, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete unless some speedy footwork gets done establishing previously unreferenced notability. Adrian Lamo ·· 19:45, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, because the legal threat made me do it. User:Zoe|(talk) 21:39, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, because there is no evidence of notability. The name-dropping is sickening as is the link farming. Check out the edit history. Clearly written by the person themselves or alternatively a friend or relative. Maustrauser 22:27, 11 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete Allmusic.com doesn't have an article on her. Capitalistroadster 00:23, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep or Delete THIS IS THE PERSON ABOUT WHOM THIS ARTICLE WAS WRITTEN. MY married name is Kim Deanda. My son has brought to my attention the exceptional immaturity going on here, pretending musical archival research. Wikipedia has a criteria cited above called WP:NMG, for persons of musical notariety. This offers general recommendations. Now, this entry was unfinished and contains no UPLOADED photos, as it was not finished, and this should be obvious. In fact, it wasn't even formatted until a day ago. Meanwhile, a bunch of people ran in here and attempted to research an entry that was unfinished. This created a problem. SECOND, the Wiki criteria states a recommendation that the person recieved radio airplay nationally and that the project was written up in a journal of thier peers. IN FACT, THIS IS THE CASE. The major Music journal was CCM MAGAZINE, which is the number one journal for Christian contemporary music and still is. The primary project I was associated with was Breakfast With Amy, as co-writer, and the Wiki criteria is for songwriters applied here specifically. IF you research the CCM archives you find they have still to upload the actual articles, as they trace back for 15 years or so, in the same way you can't find the Rolling Stone articles for many people. This is not surprising. Most magazines limit the number of back issues they scan onto the internet. However, looking at the WIki criteria, you see that it is enough to qualify B.W.A. as per their national radio airplay, association with Dakota Motor Company, which was on the cover of CCM, another I AM /AMY offshoot. What you find is that we are getting into a genre of music, as the Wiki criteria states, where the persons involved have been influenctial in beginning a 'movement' that influenced many bands to come: Christian Alternative. Here, you have a genre, as Wiki states, where you have the onset of the genre itself beginning with only a handful of people. Those people, in Christian music, changed the genre and developed a new one that has grown immensely. Now, there has been thousands of bands come out of what was originally a movement started by just a handful of folks in Orange County, California. The first such band, was 'I AM'. From 'I AM' came an offshoot of related projects that became nationally known in ivolving its memebers. THe bassplyer CHris Colbert went on to be the first major Christain Alt producer who has now produced over forty bands, and he currently heads the console of Gene Eugene, the first such CHristian producer. Our Guitarist, Koval, started both Amy and Dakota Motor Company, made the cover of CCM Magazine, too. That means the cover of the most important peer magazine inthe world for the entire genre. This was while he was in Amy. I am the singer from 'I AM', and I co-wrote songs for the first 'Amy' album with Koval and Colbert. It appears, Koval and I founded this genre, which is quite surprising, but, we did, and when we met Colbert, he could not even play his bass, but we gave him his start, and this led to a huge movement. AMY are the first Christian project EVER to be what is called 'da-'daist'...like Frank Zappa, the weirdest, strangest CHristian band that had ever come up. Nothing like it existed before ! This was like nothing I could explain but to compare it to Frank Zappa. According to Wiki, you want to see national radio airplay, I also mentioned DJ Diedre O' Donahue, who was the first alt DJ in Los Angeles, citing them as a favorite. They recived national airplay, people as far away as Germany known who they are. I was quite surprised how big this got and I am fair bowled over. THe article is not finishd folks, and in the field of music and archiving, there are research models that include looking up CCM Magazine. Mike Knott of the Lifesavers, also huge in the genree, now controls the re-issues, and what you will find is a unique genre that isn't Amy Grant or CC Wynan, but the CHristain Punk and Alt. genre. I was the first fenale Christian ALt. frontwoman that we know of, and from that project came so many people who changed CHristian music and developed a new genre. THIS is what Wiki is looking for, NOT just anybody's little band. You have to be connected to founding a movement and you have to influence many people who come after you. YOu have to get national radio airplay, etc. Frank Zappa is in this position, rarely selling more than 50k records, but he is in a class of his own, and Patty Smith, The Sex Pistols, Captain Beefheart. Since the article is being read by people who have no idea who opened the door for Creed and Switchfoot, especially, neither of whom I liked, but both are Christian, Stryper was the first such metal band and I would give the Sweet brothers and article here, as well as Mike Knott and the Lifesavers. YOu may not have eve heard of them, but millions of grown kids now know who they are and you are onto the beginning of an entire movement. CCM needs to get its archives up and get on the ball, but being the Rolling Stone of all CHistian music, who knows why they have only lists up. You can find all of these bands on those lists, but not the actual articles. Wiki is looking for the founders of the given genres, and that is in their list of notable requirements. PLease read the categories on the list entirely, and you will understand what this is about. In the meantime, the article still had no photos, no discography, and was just getting off the ground. THe people I have mentioned ALSO deserve an article here - especially Christ Colbert, Mike Knott, and Stryper. I would add Koval here, but I don't know where the guy is. Chris is very renown and he was my Co-writer, as mentioned. He had a lot of success in the secular Duralux, but mostly as the primary CHristian alt producer in the world today. SO, well, see. But I would appreciate a tone of some seriousness and trust about music archiving, and this is a model article to learn what that is. Wiki wants to be the largest info database in the world. That won't happen if everytime you run into something YOU have never heard of in your given taste and you try to delete it. Google hits won't bring up even the Rolling Stone archives. It is quite hairy when you get into notable actors of the twenties: have to go to the Bison Archives. So, I appreciate the maturity of people really interested in music archiving, but this does get goofy. The African heritage thing seems to be inciting something, too, and gosh, after months, the moment I put that up, there is a sudden problem - literally within the hour. Then, there is the Christian thing. Hey, folks, show some manners on the religious affiliation. This is an encyclopedia of the folk sort, anyone can edit, be an administrator, and it seems to open up the whole thing to reckless behavior and poor research models. Normal encyclopedias seek out and only hire the special specialists in each given genre (say, here, Mike Knott would be that), to write the entry for the given subject, but here you have anybody who can type knocking whatever they have never heard of and using models of research that don't fit the given entry, and tantrums and pseudo-intellectualism. I don't care either way about the article because it isn't locked and is part of a folk experiment that is causing a lot of people to withdraw because articles are constantly defaced. Everyone from Bill Gates, to the Country of Germany, to the Prime Minister of NOrway has had thier entry defaced and some with claims they are pedophiles and all kinds of garbage. Every five minutes the thing is a wreck ...and it doesn't look like it is going to stop. Record Co. websites are locked and the KH project will have that. This is just an experimental folk thing. Will it get better ? Maybe not. I don't care either way. Best of Luck —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 12.72.26.158 (talk • contribs) 2006-02-12 11:52:41.
Good luck with your career, and thank you for taking the time to share your thoughts on Wikipedia :) Adrian Lamo ·· 04:58, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete, unverifiable. Stifle 23:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per nom. Arbustoo 01:20, 13 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:MUSIC. 205.188.117.5 04:56, 13 February 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.