Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Beat Monks

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. howcheng {chat} 21:24, 29 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] The Beat Monks

Nearly invisible band & copyvio from http://www.myspace.com/thebeatmonks. Madman 19:35, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

• Yes, they may be obscure, but that still does not warrant the deletion of it. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia of information, and this band does indeed exist. So my vote is to keep it up. By the way, I greatly wikified the article so it should at least please the casual viewer if nothing else.Turk Ranma 20:58, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
• In regards to the copyvio, I personally know one of the members of the band and he gave me permission to use the pictures. Of course, this can't be directly proven. The best thing to do is send a comment to User:Beamguarden who started the article for proof.
• If I may ask, what is the reasoning behind deleting an article just because it is obscure? So far no one has seemed to justify why exactly they have a problem with this fact. Sure, I could understand if it was a complete vanity article; simply showcasing some random person or thing. But this group does indeed fit a the ambient/instrumental genre of music and has released multiple records and songs fitting said genre. Lastly, (and believe me I'm not trying to gloat) the article does indeed fit the wiki requirements in regards to format and appearence. So at least, as I stated above, the casual passerby who does not intend to delete the article, will get more than their share of info on the band.Turk Ranma 21:48, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Turk Ranma did indeed update the page. It looks pretty darn right good now (better than many many pages). Still concerned about the non-notability of the band, and the fact that much of the verbiage is taken from http://www.myspace.com/thebeatmonks. Madman 23:05, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
• keep as per ranma Jcuk 23:38, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom. Also, can we say SOCKPUPPET! 68.162.40.100 02:22, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I wasn't intentionally creating a sockpuppet, I just sometimes forget to log in.!Turk Ranma 19:47, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom; despite the release of 3 CDs, they were on an indie label. The Influences section is now a black and blue wall of words that exhausts the reader by the time the fifth line is read. Regarding the pictures: there's a difference between giving an editor permission to use the pictures and giving Wikipedia permission, and it must be verifiable that permission is given to Wikipedia to use them if the pictures are to be part of an article. B.Wind 16:24, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. A search for band name combined with album name gives 2 hits. Perhaps userfy. Punkmorten 16:27, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not all information has to have its own article, plus no single article links to the Beat Monks! --DelftUser 18:37, 20 December 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - fails WP:MUSIC FCYTravis 22:54, 20 December 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.