Talk:Tonight The Prom

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

is this good enough for the notability guidelines. please let me know what to add to follow the guidelines.(MyDingo21 00:57, 2 March 2007 (UTC))

• I believe it's notable enough; the article should be cleaned up, though. The title of the page is probably misspelled? I'm not sure enough of the facts - it probably is misspelled, though. --Strangerer (Talk) 04:07, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

ok yeah i misspelled "Tonight" how do i change that it's supposed to be "Tonight The Prom" i'm so sry i did it right the first time when i tried to create this article,it was rejected though.....the send time around i didn't care as much,i'm sorry about the misspelling how do i change that.What do u mean by clean-up? (MyDingo21 01:44, 5 March 2007 (UTC))

• Haha, I will move it. As a note on the above about notability, the band has received coverage from independent sources and has been put into rotation by a major radio network. --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 01:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • And by cleanup, I mean that you may want to primarily assert why the band is notable, and then put the band biography near the bottom. This means following the criteria at WP:MUSIC and putting in the reasons why it is notable near the top. Please remember that this is an encyclopedia and that we care more about why people are notable rather than how they formed. :) --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 02:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
    • WP:MUSIC asserts that national rather than local rotation is the criterion. Here, this station seemingly supports nascent 'garage bands.' Also, worth mentioning is whether this is trivial coverage or not. I cannot make such an evaluation but it is important to consider this. A major problem of this article is that it is written from the perspective of the band itself which might fall into the jurisdiction of WP:NOR. Last names and specific, informative details should be added and the article should be written in a more encyclopedic tone. - DaoKaioshin 06:20, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Is it ok now? I put more information on why they are important and what they offer. Does that cover it?(75.5.33.194 20:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)).

[edit] Article created with notability tag

When this article was created, it was created with a notability tag (see diffs). This leads me to believe that the article has been previously deleted. Ronbo76 21:17, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not certain if either the ITunes page or local band interview are notable references since they both may be closer to blogging or self-publishing than independent verification. Do you know how the ITunes store functions in this regard? Otherwise, this might need an AfD vote. - DaoKaioshin 03:30, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

I am so lost with this thing. I've put up all the proof i could find I'm still waiting on an article from a student at Bradley University, He is doing on tonight the prom for the newspaper. Other than that MySpace,radio interview and itunes are my only resources. As for notability,isn't notability concerning how the band has affected music,Tonight the prom has affected Chicago music and people there,it's just tough writing about a band that is getting so much recognition from Chicago in such a short period all while being 16 and 17.(MyDingo21 03:27, 6 March 2007 (UTC))

Please see the wikilinks in the messages left on your talkpage for the appropriate links to citing reliable sources. Myspace dot com is not considered a reliable link as it is self-posted. Wikipedia:Attribution is the overall policy to writing and citing an article here on Wikipedia. A student newspaper article does not sound like a reliable source either as that would most likely be a "friendly" source and not one that you would encounter at 60 Minutes, Billboard or another professional critic site. Please read Wikipedia:Attribution as none of the edits today meet that policy. Ronbo76 03:34, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Why does Wikipedia make things so hard,i understand you have to have proof for an article and i do,itunes (which is available to the public) and a huge radio interview (which was obviously heard by the public). How is a newspaper(that is seen by the public) not good enough? I'm sure there are other articles that don't have enough proof yet i have a radio interview and an EP on itunes as a source and it's still not good enough while other articles that have no point,not even such notability or mere value are put up undisturbed? I'm sure no one outside of Wikipedia would really complain about my sources because they are available to the public which means they are reliable excluding the Myspace website.