Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Songs To Wear Pants To

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 DELETE. Herostratus 17:10, 28 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Songs To Wear Pants To

Article apparently largely the work of the webmaster, according to exchan ges at the admins' noticeboard, Alexa rank is just short of the million mark. Some minor notoriety, but no real evidence of significance or widespread currency. Guy 22:13, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Not notable per WP:WEB. Guinness 23:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. I can't see any evidence of any work done by the webmaster. Also, the article clearly establishes its notability in accordance with WP:WEB. In case the small number of considerably notable references aren't convincing, the website's press page contains a list of verifiable notable appearances, of which only a few are mentioned in the article. --EndlessVince 00:01, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. Also, in response to the noticeboard exchanges, the webmaster of Songs To Wear Pants To is distantly associated from WhatIsJoppa. STWPT created a theme song for Joppa in exchange for money; not as a result of any real friendship or association with the WhatIsJoppa.com website. --EndlessVince 00:13, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Fails WP:WEB and Alexa Web Traffic rank of 927,934. --Nishkid64 01:14, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete non-notable. Orsini 01:34, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment. According to WP:WEB. Web-specific content is notable if it meets any one of the following: criteria...The content itself has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent of the site itself. The article establishes that it has, in fact established notability. It has been the subject of publications on Television (Call For Help) [1], CBC Radio 3 [2], Exclaim Magazine [3] (which has a circulation of 100,000 copies [4]) and according to the STWPT website, Harpers Magazine (which has a circulation of 225,425 copies [5])--EndlessVince 02:27, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
    • Comment Of the three of those links which reference the site, two contain only a single paragraph, and therefore I'd consider them 'trivial' (even if the publication itself is not considered trivial, the actual article is). IMHO, the article has not demonstrated notability. Guinness 12:09, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

  Yes, but I think it's also safe to assume that a broadcast (on a major station) on the subject would be more than two minutes long, and show notes on a website would be considerably shorter. --EndlessVince 16:16, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

• Keep but expand references section to include more links. WP:WEB requires that the page show enough press coverage to satisfy point 1. --Roninbk 21:53, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per JzG, Nishkid64. For me the links above do not rise above the trivial. Angus McLellan (Talk) 22:59, 21 September 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.