Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Resonance (MIT)

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 KEEP (no consensus). TigerShark 08:51, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Resonance (MIT)

Delete. Poor assertion of significance for this musical ensemble - one song included on one compilation album of unknown popularity. An MIT student group, one of several a cappella groups on campus, which was reviewed in the campus newspaper three times... We must apply WP:MUSIC equally here. (This started with ((db-band)), which is not undeserved here, despite the fact that the article looks good.) (OMG I forgot to sign!) - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email

There's no need for that big bolded "delete" there. It makes you look like you think you're voting; and nobody wants that, right? fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 08:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

There are decidedly different schools of thought about that. It's been litigated to death before. It's not a vote, it's a recommendation. - CrazyRussian talk/email 13:26, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, sort of. There's two schools of thought about making a bolded recommendation in your nomination. One is that it's silly, encourages poor nominations, makes the nominator look a bit of a twit, and most importantly, earns the Official Fuddlemark Stamp of Disapproval. The other school says "well, I saw a newbie do it the other day, why shouldn't I?". I know the latter argument is a powerful one; it's the primary reason behind the celebrated Chinese Whispers Method of Policy Creation. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 12:10, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep. As far as college a cappella groups go, Resonance is fairly notable. The group has made the lineup for 2006 Best of College A Cappella, an album released annually by the Contemporary A Cappella Society, the coordinators of the International Championship of College A Cappella. Isopropyl 18:33, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
  • If a band had one song included on one published compilation album it would fail WP:MUSIC. This is no different. - CrazyRussian talk/contribs/email 18:36, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment. Resonance won a couple CASA awards, and they've gone on tours [1]. Other than that, there aren't a whole lot of college a cappella groups who release albums on major labels. Not passing WP:MUSIC is not an automatic deletion. Isopropyl 18:55, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per CrazyRussian. -- Kjkolb 20:59, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep, no reason to delete. I'm going to suggest, per Isopropyl, that WP:MUSIC should be ignored here. The article is well written with a neutral and encyclopedic tone — unlike most band articles that hit AfD, this isn't a blatant attempt at self-promotion, nor is it particularly crufty. Not everything that may be deleted according to policy must be deleted. In my opinion, losing this article would be a net loss for the encyclopedia. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:22, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Can you explain what exactly you think the net loss would be if this article was deleted? Bwithh

• Delete per Crzrussian. No matter how high the quality of the article, that doesn't merit a Wikipedia article or create instant notability. I did outside research and couldn't find anything, it appears to be non-notable and undeserving of an article. Yanksox ^(talk) 02:47, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

• All I can say, now that I am promoted, is that, had someone else tagged it for {{db-band}} and I was reviewing it off of C:CSD, I would certainly have honored it. And yes, anything that can be deleted, probably should be deleted, because we must have articles only on truly worthy topics so to continue to be highly regarded by the reading public. - CrazyRussian talk/email 02:55, 16 June 2006 (UTC)

• In that case, for the sake of the useful articles that you will delete through ignorance or ineptitude, I request that you do not speedy delete anything in the forseeable future. We have a good record for speedying trash and keeping non-trash, and I for one do not want to see you piss that down the drain with such actions. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 08:46, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• I would like to second this - Crazyrussian, your suggested policy here is completely at odds with settled Wikipedia policy. Georgewilliamherbert 18:04, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

 AFD relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
 Please add new discussions below this notice. Thanks, Petros471 18:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

• Keep high quality article, notable group, not doing any harm. Joeyramoney 19:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete As a MIT alum, I believe this is a very much a non-notable group. The article harms Wikipedia's reputation/image as an encyclopedia as opposed webhosting service. Quality of the article is entirely irrelevant for afd discussions. Although, how people consider an article with a strained "earwax for dinner" anecdote to be "high quality", I don't know. Bwithh 19:35, 18 June 2006 to a free (UTC)
• Keep per above. --badlydrawnjeff talk 20:43, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. No matter how much buffing and polishing you give to the article, it's still about a unnotable music group -- no storied history, no big record deals, no huge critical acclaim, etc. --Calton | Talk 05:11, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. College society. -- GWO
• I agree with Isopropyl (talk · contribs), these guys are quite notable as such groups go, and the article's doing no harm. It's also never in a million years speediable, and I'm baffled as to why a) you tagged it as such, and b) you then complained that the tag was removed in your nomination. What on Earth? fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 08:31, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

• Hmmm. No assertion of compliance with the relevant standard - WP:MUSIC in this case. Not that farfetched. - CrazyRussian talk/email 10:56, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

• WP:MUSIC is not the relevant standard for deciding on whether or not to speedy an article about a musical group. You're an admin. You should know these things. fuddlemark (befuddle me!) 11:43, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

• Mark and I have discussed this privately. He's right. - CrazyRussian talk/email 10:33, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete agree with Crazy Russian and Bwithh. Of note is the song "Badly" written by Dan Katz, another MIT student not directly related to Resonance, as this is believed to constitute the first acoustic rock song written by an MIT student which has been arranged and performed by a MIT a cappella group. It reads like self-referential vanity -- Samir धर्म 08:38, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as per WP:MUSIC. -- 80.168.224.129 09:10, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Merge with Massachusetts_Institute_of_Technology#Culture_and_student_life. An article significant within it's own sphere of influence and interest, but not notable enough for inclusion in a general encyclopedia, it should be merged with a broader article on the topic.--SB | T 09:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. WP:MUSIC is not violated; they have "won or placed at a major music competition", in this case the Best of College A Cappella, which for the college a capella circuit is major. Content and POV issues are not AfD issues. Batmanand | Talk 09:25, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Batmanand et al. Notability established by 2006 Best of College A Cappella. --CComMack 10:23, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep - notability has been established. Cleanup if necessary, no deletion. Georgewilliamherbert 18:04, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Batmanand. Thatcher131 18:39, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per above. Additionally, I believe meeting WP:MUSIC is sufficient, but not necessary, for an article on such a subject to be kept. Failing it should not be an automatic delete: it merely states that the subject doesn't fall in one of the common classes of notability, and requires more research. WP:MUSIC works best for popular recorded music genres, and falls behind for others. Matthew Brown (Morven) (T:C) 20:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and cleanup. Failing that, merge into an article on MIT music groups. It's definately not a speedy candidate, and as noted above, they meet WP:MUSIC (which as a guideline really doesn't work here). [ælfəks] 02:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. Perfectly reasonable article. McKay 09:11, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep per Batmanand. Note while I go to MIT, I am not in Resonance, so there is no conflict of interest. Nationalparks 03:10, 21 June 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.