Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kindergarten Hazing Ritual
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 16:00, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Kindergarten Hazing Ritual
This musical project has some releases, but I have a feeling they don't meet WP:MUSIC guidelines. 160 google hits indicate no substantial following. Punkmorten 10:41, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- Well-thought-out nomination, Punkmorten. KHR do seem to have (quite) a few releases, but their label doesn't seem notable enough to get them past WP:MUSIC. Note that Cybergrind has referenced Kindergarten Hazing Ritual since May 2005, while the KHR article was created in July 2005 by a different IP. This indicates that at least two people (one of whom might be Cory) think the band is notable, at least within the Cybergrind musical genre. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 16:43, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- * Keep. WP:MUSIC is not the end-all be-all yardstick by which all music entries must pass. From the music notability guide: These are simply guidelines "which many editors agree with in principle. However, it is not policy." And most importantly, it clearly states: "Please note that the failure to meet any of these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted". wikipediatrix 17:57, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- I hope you aren't running around saying "keep" in response to every nomination that cites WP:MUSIC. If so, I'm afraid you misunderstand the purpose of the music notability guidelines. Failing WP:MUSIC usually indicates that a band is not notable enough for an article; however, there are circumstances when we don't want to get tied down to "fails $x, therefore we have no choice", hence we have "guideline" and "does not mean an article must be deleted". See also m:instruction creep and WP:IAR. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 18:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- * Keep. WP:MUSIC is not the end-all be-all yardstick by which all music entries must pass. From the music notability guide: These are simply guidelines "which many editors agree with in principle. However, it is not policy." And most importantly, it clearly states: "Please note that the failure to meet any of these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted". wikipediatrix 17:57, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- I had considered this case borderline and didn't VfD it because, at least, the article was somewhat interesting. However, if we must follow a strict interpretation of WP:MUSIC, I would agree with you that it should be deleted. My own personal view is that WP:MUSIC may be too strict... You have to love the name though. :) JRP 18:03, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- Yes, 'tis a great name. fuddlemark (fuddle me!) 18:32, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- Delete. Allmusic.com has no record of them and limited Google results - nearly600 [1] indicates that they don't meet WP:NMG. Capitalistroadster 23:26, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom Bwithh 00:31, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
- delete NN band vanity, fails WP:MUSIC Pete.Hurd 03:40, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
- Delete, as everyone above has stated. RasputinAXP talk contribs 13:54, 27 November 2005 (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.
