Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bucium, folk rock band

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...with some caveats.

To begin with, if the claims of the anonymous IPs below are true, then the band is notable per Wikipedia's notability guidelines for musicians. However, as additional discussion failed to locate the sources backing these claims up, the article is in violation on the policy on verifiability and thus unsuitable for inclusion at this time.

On the flip side, there is the definite possibility that sources exist, but no one here is capable of reviewing them. The English-language Wikipedia comes with certain systematic biases that make us ill-equipped for handling cases like this, and so it is perfectly possible that a failure to locate sources reflects the limits of the community rather than the limits of the information available.

So in the interest of not biting the newcomers, I have a couple of recommendations. First, I would recommend that if the band is indeed notable, it might be beneficial to start by expanding their article on the Romanian Wikipedia to include the sources required for verification. When a sufficient amount of information has been gathered to establish notability as required by the English-language Wikipedia, I will be happy to restore and userfy the deleted page here for further expansion. --jonny-m t 07:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bucium, folk rock band

I declined this speedy because it asserts vague notability (the talk page link for example), and therefore it can't be deleted via CSD. However the band does not appear to be notable, so I leave it up to the community. PeterSymonds (talk) 14:29, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Captain-tucker (talk) 15:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
DELETE, Band does fails WP:MUSIC, only one released album which fails WP:MUSIC#C5 and no other evidence provided or could be obtained through a quick google search. Note that the speedy delete was placed one minute after the article was created and the AfD placed 18 minutes later. The editor should be given some time to provide evidence of notability so as to not give the impression of WP:BITE. I placed a note on the editors talk page pointing to WP:MUSIC and others.... --Captain-tucker (talk) 15:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - rather triggy happy nomination, 19mins after creation. Would like to hear from the author, plus give them a chance to expand the article before !voting. Paulbrock (talk) 17:08, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: trigger happy or not, it fails WP:MUSIC. 19 minutes is not too fast for a speedy deletion nomination, why should this be different? -- Roleplayer (talk) 20:26, 8 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

As per Captain-tucker, editor should be given some chance to provide evidence of notability. It would be nice if all articles were drafted first, fully referenced and checked, then moved to article space but that's not what happens, and speedying and/or AFDing before an editor has had adequate chance to finish what they were doing or respond to concerns is just going to put people off WP. Paulbrock (talk) 03:47, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, article fails to establish notability as per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 00:55, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Why don`t you wait for a few months and see if the notability increases, they will get reviews in the main sites in the next months, why hurry so much? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.76.131.76 (talk) 08:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because you yourself admit in that statement that there is a chance that their notability may not increase. The best way to go about this is if their notability has increased after a few months and you can prove that using verifiable sources, then come back and start again. --

Roleplayer (talk) 12:37, 9 June 2008 (UTC) article 12. on notability Has been the subject of a half hour or longer broadcast across a national radio or TV network. we`ve been 4 times live on national television with one hour and two hours shows...as a proof I should upload that on youtube and post the link? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.76.131.76 (talk) 10:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Appeared as in played a song, or appeared as in had an half-hour long show DEDICATED to them? I think the latter is what the WP:MUSIC criteria is getting at. Paulbrock (talk) 12:19, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Appeared as in playing 1 hour live and in talking one hour with the host - 2 times, and playing 1 hour another 2 times. Yesterday we did an unplugged show at the national radio for another hour. we really do play... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.76.131.76 (talk) 12:21, 11 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - fails WP:MUSIC, and also COI/self-promotion, as admitted at Talk:Bucium, folk rock band. Biruitorul ^Talk 03:31, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Another review on obliveon.de -

http://www.obliveon.de/pn-om/modules.php?op=modload&name=tplcdimport&file=index&req=showcontent&id=11735&cfletter=B

Keep assuming 82.76.131.76 is correct - this would clearly pass WP:MUSIC. Names of shows and stations would be great, along with any links! Paulbrock (talk) 08:50, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

the televisions are tvr1, tvr2, tvr cultural, tvrm. www.tvr.ro —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.76.131.76 (talk) 15:53, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Then again, do you really want User:Buciumro to write an article on Bucium? WP:COI and all that... Biruitorul ^Talk 19:39, 12 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

dear biruitorul, what conflict of interests do you see in a band writing the article based only on facts that were published before, by other newspapers, magazines, websites? don`t you think that the band knows itself better than a volunteer editor? you would be right only if what the article says it`s a lie, in which case please tell us what do you think the lie is. The information can be verified, there are photos of newspapers and magazines in which we appeared that can prove what we said. I really take it as a bite of the newcomers...i don`t understand if I bring proofs of the WP:MUSIC - paragraph 1 and paragraph 12 why that isn`t enough? it`s kinda strange... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.239.228.205 (talk) 12:49, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to begin with, see WP:RS - you have failed to provide any reliable sources for what you have written, and these are required in order to establish notability. Biruitorul ^Talk 16:51, 14 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, to begin with: here you find some press releases about everything I said before; http://www.metalfan.ro/trupe.php?id_trupa=555 here you find band`s page on metal archives http://www.metal-archives.com/band.php?id=123248 I will upload on youtube the performances on national television, it seems there`s no other way - I have to convert them first from DVD to mpeg4 for upload... Bucium's page on Artmania Festival website http://www.artmaniafestival.ro/en/bucium.php Bucium`s page on Rock'n'Iasi festival website http://www.rockniasi.ro/formatii/bucium.html

http://www.spirit-of-metal.com/groupe-groupe-Bucium-l-en.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.239.228.205 (talk) 15:09, 15 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

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.