Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wild Cherries

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 Keep Eluchil404 01:59, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Wild Cherries

Non-notable band; does not seem to be meet WP:MUSIC. google:"Krome+Plated+Yabbie" concerns me. ~ PseudoSudo 08:20, 19 June 2006 (UTC)

hey! there is a band called wild cherry. Or anyway, there WAS, their greatest hit- play that funky music was an one-hit-wonder in the sixties. not at "big" band, but not "local" either. I, for one, think that the Cherry deserves a little space of its own in wikipedia. [1]

  • Keep, These are not Wild Cherry who had a hit with play that funky music white boy. They are an Aussie band who had a following in the Melbourne scene. In particular, Lobby Loyde is quite notable. He was briefly a member of Rose Tattoo according to the Encyclopedia of Australia produced by Webster Publishing. He was also a member of Billy Thorpe and the Aztecs [2] a very notable Australian band and the Purple Hearts. He would later go on and form the Coloured Balls. The ABC television series Long Way to the Top refers to this band and features an interview with Loyde see [3] They are a notable Australian band and Loyde is a notable Australian musician. Capitalistroadster 13:03, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • I have added references to the article. Capitalistroadster 13:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 13:27, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - Lobby Loyde and his bands are ridiculously notable in Australian music. Same for the other musicians - no reason to delete. Note that WP:MUSIC is guidelines not to delete rather than guidelines to keep, because of its US-centricity. Note also the 'what links here' for Lobby Loyde. This nomination is a classic "delete because I've never heard of it" - David Gerard 13:58, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
    Your response seems to assume bad faith on the part of the nominator, who made reference to the appropriate guideline. That guideline, btw, says in the second full paragraph that it is a rule-of-thumb that can be ignored in favor of keeps or deletes as desired. I'm not sure what you mean that it's only a guideline "not to delete". I, for one, will await more evidence and arguments, but if the band is kept, I think all the bio's (except Lobby Loyde's) ought to be merged and redirected.--Chaser T 16:05, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
    It does not assume bad faith - it assumes bad judgement. Great big obviously bad judgement, with the shiniest of intentions. It appears you don't know the history of or controversy over WP:MUSIC either - David Gerard 22:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
    I'll accept the assuming bad judgment bit. My mistake. You're also right that I'm not aware of the history or controversy over WP:MUSIC. As to your earlier assertion, I believe you're referencing the catchall exception implied when it says notability is proven by meeting any one of the following criteria, but we'll have to agree to disagree about whether the article asserts enough notability to qualify as a catch-all keep.--Chaser T 00:03, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
    Excuse me. This nomination is a classic "delete because their most notable release got three hits on google." I don't know how much clearer my nom could have been. I take offense to being stereotyped; please try to take this into account in the future when making such statements. ~ PseudoSudo 01:14, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
    You may be shocked to hear that prior to 1995, information was stored on stuff called "paper" rather than on Google. Pre-1995 information not being on Google is not a sensible reason for a deletion nomination. I'm afraid the stereotype stands and has been reinforced - David Gerard 20:44, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
    Your qualms with WP:MUSIC are quite clear but you don't address where I went wrong in judging notability. The article spoke for me: a band with no album releases to their name, article without a single reference; I don't understand where you can blame my impaired judgement, especially considering you're aware of my ignorance on the subject matter. By nominating this article with a particularly concise opening statement I acknowledged my ignorance and let the discussion take the course it needed to. A statement about my character in this AfD was just the last thing I expected. ~ PseudoSudo 00:33, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep - Well known band in Melbourne if not Australia; Ditto for Lobby Loyde. -- Synapse 15:59, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Capitalistroadster, though based on the lack of information out there as well as the interesting hits produced by googling "Wild Cherries", I can see why this got nominated. Great example of why a worldwide userbase is so important to Wikipedia.--Isotope23 16:51, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, meets WP:BAND, well-known in Australia. --Coredesat 19:24, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep perfectly good stub--Childzy (Talk|Contribs) 19:52, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep - in particular Lobby Loyde - see ref now attached to his article. His article still needs adding to so as to explain notability.--A Y Arktos\talk 21:32, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
    Working on it. He's splattered across the length and breadth of Australian rock music history; deleting his article would be stupid - David Gerard 22:53, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep. I've never heard of them, and that fact is, naturally, irrelevant to this AfD discussion. Many others have heard of them, and they've got notability in a country of 20 million people. Interlingua talk 22:19, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
    • 20,564,098 + 1 every 2 minutes 12 seconds [4]  :-) --A Y Arktos\talk 23:36, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Announcement: I have removed Lobby Loyde from this nomination given new information on notability; article's keep is currently uncontested. ~ PseudoSudo 01:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep per Capitalistroadster -- I@n ≡ talk 04:02, 22 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.