Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tummel

Tummel

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Music group with no assertion of notability, I had declined speedy prior to make it a redirect Alexandria (talk) 03:58, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 04:13, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Try these:

Ben Ohmart, The Muse's Muse - CD Review: Tummel - Klezmer. 17 Nov 2001.

Chris Nickson CD Universe Review "A Danish/Swedish band with no deep Jewish roots playing klezmer? Well, why not, especially when it's done as well as Tummel does on Klezmer."

Eelco Schilder Folkworld CD Reviews - Tummel 'Oy' "Oy is a fresh, strong cd and highly recommended to everybody who likes Klezmer music."

Robert M Tilendis Green Man Review - Tummel 'Payback Time' "Think about the band playing on while the Titanic goes down. Think of some of Joel Gray's bitchier numbers in Cabaret. Think of Josephine Baker at her most outrageous taking Paris by storm. Think of a bunch of crazy Swedes with no inhibitions whatsoever getting together and letting everyone have it, right between the eyes. That might give an inkling of the tone of Tummel's Payback Time."

I think that would be enough to demonstrate Notability. Actually I had a quick listen too. Not bad! Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:31, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I have swiftly added these reviews (with a few more quotes) to the article. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:49, 29 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I was only aware that Tummel was well known enough in Sweden to be regarded as notable, but Chiswick Chap has shown above that - in addition to this - the band also has an international reputation which I was not aware of. /FredrikT (talk) 21:34, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep thanks to Chiswick Chap's sourcing. The Steve 00:59, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, fails to meet any of the criteria listed in WP:BAND. First criterion is non-trivial coverage "in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries" - the reviews listed seem to be more akin to blogs than online versions of print media (correct me if I'm wrong). 126.109.230.149 (talk) 01:31, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Band says "at least one of the following criteria".

Criterion #1 says "..subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works in all forms.." - we have here the long-standing and very reputable FolkWorld.de's CD Reviews which have been trusted and helpful to folk music fans like me for over 10 years now; and the very large and respected CD Universe which writes "reliable, independent" reviews of thousands of CDs. Together these certainly meet WP:Band. The Muse's Muse is not a blog, either, but a long-standing songwriting website, founded in 1995, so it is not only independent and reliable, but written with knowledge. The Green Man Review is more of a music blog - perhaps you were referring to this, but a considered and thoughtful one, and in any case it's just a supplementary source.

If that's not enough (I suggest it should be) then recall that WP:Band Criterion#5 has "released two or more albums on a major label or on one of the more important indie labels". 'Payback Time' and 'Transit' were both released on CD Baby.Com/Indys, which is a very large, possibly the largest, indie label. Klezmerized/Oy was released by Arc Music, founded in 1976, which has released over 700 CDs of folk and world music. It is probably (as it claims) the largest world music label in, er, the world. Chiswick Chap (talk) 07:58, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, WP:Band says at least one, which is why I said fails to meet ANY of the criteria. Folkworld, CD Baby.com etc, Muse Muse's, etc: you can put any adjective in front of them that you want, that doesn't mean it's true. If each of these sources meet WP:RS, prove it! Don't just spout meaningless nonsense like "long-standing and very reputable", "trusted and helpful to folk music fans like for over 10 years", "not a blog but a long-standing songwriting website", "founded in 1995, so it is not only independent and reliable, but written with knowledge" etc. You're completely missing the point.126.109.230.149 (talk) 00:36, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It should also be noted that the band has been written about and had at least one of its records reviewed by Sydsvenskan which is a major Swedish newspaper. I've added a couple of links to that paper in the article. /FredrikT (talk) 13:45, 31 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]