Talk:Coco Hayley Gordon Moore

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Stub This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.
This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject Biography because it uses a stub template.
  • If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page.
  • If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WPBiography}} template, removing {{WPBiography}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.
Articles for deletion This article was nominated for deletion on April 25, 2006. The result of the discussion was keep.

[edit] AfD

Is there anything particular that makes Coco Gordon Moore noteworthy on Wikipedia? I don't think simply being the daughter of Thurston Moore and Kim Gordon automatically qualifies one for an encyclopedic entry. I may nominate this article for deletion if no one can give any reason better than that. --Jakob Huneycutt 19:23, 2 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Proposed Deletion

I've decided to nominate for proposed deletion instead of AfD since there was no response to my last post here on the talk page. I simply can not see how this Coco Gordon Moore is notable. The articles for Thurston Moore and Kim Gordon are only slightly longer than this article, which is amazing considering all they have done musically, but I'm not sure that being on an album cover for your parent's band or simply being a child of semi-famous musicians makes one "notable". --Jakob Huneycutt 13:14, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

I didn't even know there was a new objection to this article's existence. I would like to point out though, that this article was proposed once before and survived. To the best of my knowledge however, given her increasing participation with her parents' work and elsewhere, Coco seems to be more worthy of a Wikipedia entry than Britney Spears' kid. Cjmarsicano 13:46, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I didn't even know Britney Spears had a kid. I'll concede on that point. However it's the notability of Coco Gordon Moore that is in question here, not Britney Spears' kid. I don't think the mere fact that her parents have used her in their work really makes her notable any more than obscure local punk bands from Poughkeepsie (if there are any). --Jakob Huneycutt 14:20, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Ok, I just read the old VfD page. It appears to me that there was a unanimous vote to delete, but the article is still here and looks as if you were the one who re-created it after the first deletion so it did not, in fact, "survive" the deletion vote. --Jakob Huneycutt 14:40, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
Ms. Moore was also on a Mike Watt album in 1995. I'm sure she'll be involved with other projects in the future. Methinks she passes notability by the skin of her teeth. BTW, I didn't even know this was deleted before. Hope this stays around this time. Cjmarsicano 16:27, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
That is what happened. I just undeleted the older history some time after it had been recreated. I think that the new version of the page is fairly expansive and informative, and notability requirements have significantly diminished. She isn't entirely unknown, and I think there's enough information to justify having an article. You can say that someone notable only for their birth to famous parents isn't worth an article, but that makes it a little difficult to justify articles on Prince Emmanuel of Belgium or Countess Luana of Orange-Nassau. The VfD on this article was too long ago to serve as a justification for immediate redeletion, but if you want to return it to AfD feel free. I actually voted in favor of deletion for this article when it was nominated the last time, but I think a new vote would keep this. Sarge Baldy 16:31, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
The nobility is treated differently since heredity is what drives the passing of titles/offices/etc from one person to another. Should members of the nobility be known solely because of heredity? Not really, but the fact of the matter is, that's how the nobility functions and members of the nobility are normally well-known simply by virtue of existing. The children of American musicians and celebrities aren't well known or notable simply because of birth, however. And Coco isn't fourth in line to become monarch of Belgium or anything like that. I can't really agree about there being enough info to justify an article on her. If what is included in the article really is all that she is notable for, that would, to me, suggest she's not actually notable. --Jakob Huneycutt 16:49, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
A) Slightly ridiculous to say that "if what is included in the article really is all that she is notable for, that would... suggest she's not actually notable" - that criteria would also fit every other article on this encyclopedia. Just an observation. B) Before you even do anything else... since the info is likely to be merged if a V fD goes through, where would this item be merged with? There's three different places (Thurston Moore, Kim Gordon, and Sonic Youth) and none of them would do the subject in question justice - not to mention it wouldn't be fair to side her with one parent or the other in the merging. I still maintain that she passes minimum requirements for WP:MUSIC, since she has participated in two recordings by two prominent alternative music artists. Cjmarsicano 17:01, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
How is it ridiculous to say that? I'm asking what she is notable for and if there is anything beyond what is mentioned in the article that would make her notable. Thus far, no one has come up with anything. If there is more than what is already in the article that I am not aware of that would actually make her notable, I'd simply like to discover what it is. I'm not using the statement you quoted as some sort of criteria. I'm asking a simple question to which I haven't gotten much of an answer.
As to the second issue, if there is any material worthy of being placed in one of those other articles, perhaps we should figure out which article they would go best in. I'd say Sonic Youth since that would be simpler than deciding between Thurston M. and Kim G. I'm not sure why 'none of them would do the subject justice'. There's really no more than one or two minor things of any note whatsoever, but I wouldn't be opposed to nominate this as a candidate for merger instead of deletion. My main reason for nominating for deletion was that I posted about this a week ago, and got absolutely no response, leading me to believe there wasn't anything here too important. I'm reading the requirements on WP: MUSIC right now and I'm not seeing how she would qualify under any of that. From the info presented, she has one not-particularly notable recording of her doing a Yoko Ono cover. I wouldn't consider her crying being sampled as "performing music". Under the only possible criteria she meets, it also says "[b]ut if this is the only claim, it is probably more appropriate to have a mention in the main article and redirect to that page." So it would stand to reason that if her one Yoko Ono cover were truly worthy of being mentioned anywhere, it would probably be in either the SY article or the Moore or Gordon article. --Jakob Huneycutt 17:24, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
As I've said elsewhere, the point isn't whether people are "notable", the point is whether they've been noted. Of course that's problematic, and it's the reason so many minor entertainers have articles, even if they aren't notable. I don't see how merely having a title (as you talked about above) makes someone notable. It's not as if a boring 15th century Count like Gilbert of Montpensier was ever important. From his article, he seems to have done much less of note than the subject of this article. He had money, a title to his name, and was born to people with money and a title to their names. Clearly he wasn't notable, but he was nevertheless noted historically, and therefore deserves a place here. If you need a second example, try putting Barbara and Jenna Bush up for deletion. They're only "notable" if drinking underage and collapsing onto people at parties is notable. Sarge Baldy 21:07, 9 March 2006 (UTC)
I think you're really stating more of a personal opinion than going by what might be considered an "objective" standard here. I don't disagree with that opinion, honestly. That's the way it *should* be, but that's also not the way our society works or European societies work (past and present). People know who Barbara and Jenna Bush are because the media plasters their faces all over the place. Because of that, they are "notable" by an "objective" standard. Should the media give so much attention to them? Not really, but Wikipedia isn't really here to alter the way society functions so much as it is to report on how it functions and how it functioned in times past. I think if we go by the standard you are suggesting, the children of all entertainers and musicians would automatically be "notable" just by virtue of being born. Now, admittedly, Coco may have done one song on an album before, but that really doesn't make her any more notable than half my friends who have local bands with decent local followings. --Jakob Huneycutt 21:43, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] THE LIGHTBULB

in 2004 coco changed the spelling of her name to coko.

coko now has a band clled the lightbulb with her friends addie coley and rozee coleman.

coko plays guitar and vocals, rozee plays base and mostly vocals, and addie plays drums and some vocals

they started in 2006. they have had another person in their band but her kind of music was different then what they wanted.

they are a noise band they dont really have a beat but they like it that way.

they love to play music and thats all what really counts

they rock in their own way

Hi there, whoever you are.
What is the source for this information? In Wikipedia we can only write information that we can check and prove. It is called "verfiability". If you can provide a website that can prove this information, then it can be written in the article. See also Wikipedia:Verifiability --Amir E. Aharoni 07:42, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

they have a website, or something.


this it totally true though.

This is quite true. Coko and her friends' band, Lightbulb, has a website here- http://www.heresee.com/lightbulb.htm - and were also the point of much discussion on the sonic youth website, here- http://www.sonicyouth.com/gossip/showthread.php?t=12390 --Danny Himself 22:39, 24 August 2007 (UTC)