Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2006 November 1: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 16:32, 6 November 2006

< October 31	November 2 >

Full reviews may be found in this page history. For a summary, see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Recently concluded (2006 November)

@@ Line 9: / Line 9: @@
 </noinclude>
 ===1 November 2006===
-====[[Vernian Process]]====
-This article was deleted by [[User Talk:Coredesat|User:Coredesat]] because according to the consensus of votes, it didn't meet the music notability guidelines. The main one being that it is not signed to a record label. However, I have no intentions of signing to a label, untill I find one that will not try to rip me off at every given opportunity. For now I give away all of my music for free. I do have a link to lulu.com where my most recent L.P. can be purchased for $8, yet if a fan can't afford that, I will happily supply them with a link where they can d-load the album for free.
-It was pointed out early in the review that the article read like an advertisement. I will admit that I was new at writing wikipedia articles at the time, and had gone and changed it to reflect an encyclopedic, and non-point of view style.
-I would also like to point out that this project is the first music project that has attempted to capture the spirit of the genre [[Steampunk]]. Another band [[Abney Park (band)]] adopted this same image about two years after I started my project, yet they have a valid wiki article.
-I mentioned also in my deletion review that my project has been featured in national print media, as well as recieving the attention of [[Mick Mercer]], who is the foremost authority on the Gothic genre of music. And an accomplished journalist within the music industry for well over 25 years. Upon searching for "Vernian Process" (in quotes) on google, I recieved approximately 679 hits, from various sources both national and international. I would also like to point out that this is a studio music project geared towards creating atmospheric film score material, not a rock band. So the idea of touring nationally is a non-issue. This was actually brought to my attention via a fan who saw the deletion review posted on my wiki article. Oh and another thing, all references to my project were also deleted from the [[List of Steampunk Works]] article as well. Which smells like a personal vendetta for some reason.
-However the one thing that irks me more than anything, is that as an internationally recognized DJ and music connoisseur, I have spent the last 4 years attempting to create something completely unique that can not be compared to any pre-existing music and it is being deleted from wikipedia. Yet any number of no-talent artists who just rip everything else off, or emulate what has already been created can have a valid article. That just turns me off from this so called encyclopedia entirely, and makes me want to delete any information I have contributed here in the past. --[[User:FACT50|FACT50]] 10:48, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-*No matter how novel your works are, if we have no way to know if they're notable, how can you expect us to have an article on it? Without standards, anyone could claim to be notable enough for an article, insisting on having an entry in Wikipedia to satisfy vanity. --[[User:Improv|Improv]] 12:05, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-:*this seems to be a problem with the system, rather than with the band in question. this happens to be an area of music with which i'm familiar, and Vernian Process is definitely an important band in both the steampunk and sepiachord style histories. that it doesn't fit into the traditional categories of notoriety shouldn't be an obstacle in its specific case. i'll throw my vote in that '''an exception should be made''', without treating it as a precedent. [[User:Whateley23|Whateley23]] 23:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-::*Thanks for commenting man, now hopefully someone will actually read it, and understand the notability of this project. It's hard to claim notability when you are part of a relatively young and not widely known genre. --[[User:FACT50|FACT50]] 00:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
-*'''Endorse deletion''': no evidence as to notability provided. No prejudice against recreation if evidence of having "been featured in national print media" is provided. --[[User:Pak21|Pak21]] 13:49, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-:: Very well here is a link to [http://www.lividlookingglass.com Livid Looking Glass Magazine] (This is now a webzine, but my review was posted in issue #1 which was a print magazine available through various outlets such as Tower Records.) interview in [http://www.girlsandcorpses.com/issue10_vernian.html Girls & Corpses Magazine.] Yes I know it is a silly magazine. But it is available in print form through various outlets, as the site says. I have also been featured in various webzines [http://www.starvox.net/crypt/5sept2.htm Starvox], [http://etheremporium.pbwiki.com/Vernian%20Process Aether Emporium], [http://www.mickmercer.com/pdfs/the_mick_27.pdf The Mick], and have links on most major Steampunk related genere sites [http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/9094/STEAM.html Steampunk Database], [http://republika.pl/steampunk/ Polish Steampunk database] [ [ --[[User:FACT50|FACT50]] 15:55, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
-:::I don't understand the hang up about a having to have a record deal. In this day and age many artists are having successful careers with out signing their lives away to a record company. And what size record label is considered valid? Should we remove posts about various punk bands because they're work was release on tiny labels, often labels that were created by the band just to get thier music out. How is creating your own "bedroom" label different from self releasing your work through the internet? <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:24.18.189.42|24.18.189.42]] ([[User talk:24.18.189.42|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/24.18.189.42|contribs]]) 2 November 2006 (UTC).</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
-::::See the [[WP:MUSIC]] guideline--'''[[User:TBC|<font color="#007BA7">TBC</font>]]<big>Φ</big>[[User talk:TBC|<font color="#007BA7">talk?</font>]]''' 22:45, 2 November 2006 (UTC).
-This is an important band representing a population that is difficult quantify (that is young, poor, punk kids) but are nonetheless very active in producing our culture. Young artists which will have a signifigant impact in 20 years and have wiki mods eating crow. The criterion of "notability" the mods present is shallow. there is no way to measure the cultural impact of small bands, and if you measure their impact by their commercial status or records sold in an information age where pirated and free music make unrecordable impact on people, the standard for what is "notable" would be very mediocre as well as deceptive.  and nor is there any harm done in having an extra article, especially one so unique as this. I think the mods here are abusing their power and denying freedom of information, see: 1984.[[User:Diversityrules|Diversityrules]] 17:16, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
-:'''Comment''': this edit is this user's only contribution to Wikipedia. Is anyone surprised? --[[User:Pak21|Pak21]] 17:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
-:: I don't need a PhD in astrophysics to know mindless oppression when I see it. --Cristina Brooks, age 23.  <small>—The preceding [[Wikipedia:Sign your posts on talk pages|unsigned]] comment was added by [[User:Diversityrules|Diversityrules]] ([[User talk:Diversityrules|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/Diversityrules|contribs]]) {{{2|}}}.</small><!-- Template:Unsigned -->
-::*Well I can tell you it wasn't me. I'm not surprised though, considering I've mentioned this issue in a few Steampunk subculture forums. However I would like to get some feedback from you guys on the links I posted a few days ago. I have provided proof of notability, yet no one has said anything as of yet, let alone the people that asked for it --[[User:FACT50|FACT50]] 17:39, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
-::::* The first thing I'd note is that both the print interviews you are citing actually appear to to be exactly the same thing, so I'm not sure they really count as multiple works. Personally, I'd say Vernian Process/you are bordering on the edge of notability. Whether you are or not is likely to be established in the next few months, so leave it for now and let somebody else write the article when you are, noting [[WP:AUTO]]. --[[User:Pak21|Pak21]] 16:20, 6 November 2006 (UTC)