Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lots of college a cappella

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 with no prejudice against the nominator relisting the article individually. Gwernol 05:04, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Lots of college a cappella

Withdrawn--I'll relist individually shortly. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 16:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC) I am nominating the following college a cappella groups for deletion. Such groups should be held to the notability standards of WP:MUSIC. Obviously most of the criteria there are out of reach from most a cappella groups. However, I didn't nominate any articles for deletion which had: (1) "multiple non-trivial published works in reliable and reputable media (excludes things like school newspapers)" (2) "won a major music competition" or (3) "performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show"--although this is not sufficient by itself.

However, Wikipedia is not a free web host for college a cappella groups whose only claim to fame is alleged popularity within their own campus, articles in their school's newspaper, self-produced albums, or their own website.

Without further ado: AllNighters, Amalgamates, Aural Fixation, Beelzebubs, Chorallaries, Chord on Blues, Effusion A Cappella, Elizabethans, Gimble, Guerillacapella, Harvard Din & Tonics, Harvard-Radcliffe Veritones, Hit Paws, Humtones, The Idlers, King's Singers, Magevet, MIT/Wellesley Toons, Nassoons, Noteworthy (female a cappella), On a Sensual Note, Penn Masala, Raagapella, Ransom Notes, Redhot & Blue, ScatterTones, Smiffenpoofs, Something Extra (American musical group), The Duke's Men of Yale, The New Blue, Tonal Ecstasy, Tonic Sol-fa, WPI Simple Harmonic Motion, Williams Octet, Williams Street Mix, Zumbyes

I'll strike any of these which can prove they meet an established notability criteria at WP:MUSIC, but none currently contain evidence of that. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 23:18, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep Beelzebubs who seem to have released several albums and have longevtiy, delete the rest (I'm re-reading some though, so this might changed). --Wafulz 23:32, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Self-produced albums do not meet the notability requirements of WP:MUSIC. These albums would have to be with a major label or do well on the charts to make the group notable enough. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 23:33, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

• • The Bubs apparently were on Letterman, according to their site. Isopropyl 00:23, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Comment Regardless of the verdict, I suggest that all groups be mentioned on the individual institution's page. SliceNYC 23:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
  • Yeah just go with merge. Most of them shouldn't go beyond a listing in some form of a "clubs and sports" section. Others, like The Idlers, who claim to have performed for the president and Ed Sullivan, should get a more substantial mention. --Wafulz 23:41, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
    • Being president I'm sure you have to listen to lots of a cappella...I don't see which notability criteria that meets. There's also nothing to merge in these articles because they have no sourced content. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 23:44, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
      • Just so we're all on the same page here: Mention is different from merge. SliceNYC 23:58, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
• Suggesting we keep the Chorallaries, as two-time finalists at the International Championship of College A Cappella, and take a closer look at Penn Masala, who claim to be the first Hindi a cappella group and as such may or may not be notable. The aforementioned champsionship is probably the closest the college a cappella circuit gets to a "major music competition", in the words of WP:MUSIC, so I'd suggest any group that's placed in the finals should be kept. Keep in mind that not meeting WP:MUSIC is not grounds for automatic deletion; see this discussion. Isopropyl 00:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I must have missed the Chorallaries. I don't think I nominated anyone else who reached the finals of the International Championship of College A Cappella (that's why I didn't nominate Resonance--the group from the discussion you cite). However, I still think we should delete Penn Masala. I could start the first a cappella group only for Econ majors, etc. It's not a claim to notability. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 00:35, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. This is an arbitrary list -- for example, I doubt the Harvard Krokodiloes or the Yale Alley Cats or the Yale Spizzwinks(?) are any more notables than, say, the Nassoons, the King's Singers, or the Din & Tonics (the last of which does regular world tours and regularly has sold-out concerts on those same tours). Either delete/merge them all, or keep them. Chart123 03:53, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
  • The existence of these articles is of course not a justification. I'm hesitant to add to this nomination so late, but feel free to nominate those as well. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 06:33, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
    • I disagree. My point is that the list is arbitrary -- some have been deemed "notable," others not notable, but there's no real distinction between the notable un-listed and the not-notable listed. So, yes, I think the arbitrariness of the list is reason enough to keep all of these, insofar as the justification for deleting them is a lack of notability.
• Keep, list individually. I wholly agree that many college a cappella groups probably don't merit an article, but this shotgun approach is non-functional. Unfortunately, these simply have to be done one at a time. JDoorjam Talk 05:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The contradiction between the two preceeding keeps is the reason for the group nom. If they were listed individually, people would point to other similar articles not on the chopping block. The objection to all of these articles is the same so there's really no reason to clog the AFD page, other than to allow AFD regulars to get 20 edits for the price of one! savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 06:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. As mentioned above, this is too broad a nomination. I may be biased, but the Din and Tonics are fairly major, and have been for years. Penn Masala is definitely notable; and the King's Singers? Has the nominator ever seen the choral shelf of their local HMV's classical section? When last I looked the King's Singers had a bit of a stranglehold there. Hornplease 06:16, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

I haven't even seen the choral shelf of my local HMV. Fortunately, that's not the way we determine notability of musical groups on Wikipedia. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 06:28, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Good Lord, what a shockingly pointless reply. As I clearly should have made obvious, releasing several dozen major albums for one of the largest record companies in the UK (EMI) and completely dominating the choral music scene in terms of output for thirty years or so is what we look for on WP. A good indicator of those things: the choral shelf of your local HMV. A poor choice for someone to put choral groups up en masse for deletion: someone whose never even seen the choral shelf at their local HMV. Sigh. Hornplease 09:31, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Keep I can't comment on US College a cappella groups - but the King's Singers are something quite different. A major UK group, the original line-up featured prominently on UK national TV during the 1970s - including having several of their own national TV Shows. From a cultural point they popularised a style of music unfamiliar to many people, demonstrated the appeal of classically trained singers performing popular tunes, and arguably influenced the growth in "popular " classics, now a major part of the music industry. In addition, at least two of the original members are still high profile: Brian Kay is a well-known presenter and personality on BBC Radio 3 and Nigel Perrin a prominent classical choral conductor in the UK.
• Keep, unacceptably broad nomination. There may well be some of these groups that aren't sufficiently notable, but the presence of several obviously notable groups in the list, as highlighted by other comments above, suggests that the nominator has simply listed a capella groups en masse rather than considering each individual article in detail. --ⁿɡ͡b Nick Boalch\^talk 07:58, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. These groups have albums that have sold more copies than many of the equally small time bands or authors (in terms of books) that are present on Wikipedia. Most of them have history and tradition that is an important part of their campus community, yet merging them into the campus articles would be a disservice to both. And I echo comments above that this looks like a sloppy deletionist event rather than a thought out AfD nom. --SparqMan 13:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
• Question: What do we do with these groups once they're gone? The Dartmouth Aires (savidan is a Dartmouth undergrad, according to his personal page, which is why I mention this) are mentioned in a Dartmouth College student groups page. Ok, is that what we should do here? I think making sure the information on these pages have homes -- the Aires have a home -- should be a priority before we vote to delete. Chart123 16:59, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

The nomination is already withdrawn. I'm not familiar with the Aires but I wouldn't disapprove of including marginally notable a cappella groups on "student groups" pages. savidan^{(talk) (e@)} 17:15, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

• Tonal Ecstasy meets the following criteria for notability:

- Has won or placed in a major music competition. (ICCA, the International Championship of Collegiate A Cappella.) The group has placed in several rounds of ICCA and group members have won individual awards. - Several alumni later joined a band that is otherwise notable. Alumni Micah Shapiro and Mike Libis were both members of Throwback. Throwback toured extensively in Canada and New England and had a large regional following (I can't think of an absolute indicator of their following, but Throwback does have 12,577 friends on their myspace page). Throwback was also mentioned in a recent McGill News article about McGill alumni bands (which also mentions such notables as Arcade Fire and Leonard Cohen): http://www.mcgill.ca/news/2006/summer/rock/three/. Dee Nedd-Roderique (former member) was a member of Kobayashi, which has performed at such notable events as the Montreal International Jazz Festival. Jkisch 16:58, 26 August 2006 (UTC)

• This is absurd. You're basically saying you want to delete the groups that a) don't compete in competitions or b) aren't good enough to win them. If a group has an official webpage on the school server they are legitimate, not that legitimacy is a requirement for being on Wikipedia. Point out in the deletion policy what infractions the pages made and I'm sure the various authors will be more than willing to change them accordingly. The nominator has unreliable criteria, as they are subjective. Please leave the articles without a giant banner on them and work out something that can be approved by other contributing members of Wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 190.40.230.219 (talk • contribs) 16:01, 26 August 2006 (UTC)
  • As has been mentioned on this page, the articles violate the the notability requirements for musicians at WP:MUSIC, which isn't something that the article authors can fix, it's up to the individual a cappella groups to become notable. I see you're upset about the "giant banner" (and tried to remove it yourself from one group's page) but that is the already-established procedure that you're asking people to come up with. -- N2f 02:12, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Banner removal

The "nominated for deletion" banners should be removed until the sites are re-listed for deletion. Chart123 03:17, 27 August 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.