Talk:University of Chicago Band
|This page was nominated for deletion on 4 September 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.|
|WikiProject Chicago||(Rated Start-class, Low-importance)|
I have added a "notability" tag to the article, because I believe that it might not meet Wikipedia's guideline for what is notable. For a topic to be notable enough to warrant its own article, it must have "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." If no such coverage is demonstrated, the article may be deleted at the Articles for deletion page. According to the guideline for articles related to colleges and universities, most student organizations are not notable. — DroEsperanto (talk) 02:42, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
Hi DroEsperanto. I understand your concern about my article. I can see how it may not seem notable, but this is simply because I haven't finished adding content to it yet. I am a student at the University and, consequently, do not have a whole lot of time to spend editing wikipedia. It took me a little longer than I anticipated creating this basic outline (mostly because it is such a hassle trying to include pictures that won't get deleted). In order for articles to survive on wikipedia it seems that they have to be nearly complete otherwise it will look like they need to be deleted. I simply don't have the time right now. In the future I plan to add sources and more sub sections about our history and other notable facets of the band. In a few weeks, I feel that it will be up to code and a fine and suitable article on wikipedia.
Addressing your other concern, according to the guideline for articles related to colleges and universities, I feel that my band does qualify as notable. Of all the student organizations, I feel that bands are a little different than, for example, a star trek club. Band's tend to perform community service, where as the trekie club typically does not. Band's tend to have a lot of support from the University, and other RSO's typically don't. We have been founded the same time the University was founded (oldest RSO) and used to be a big part of the University. Things have changed now, but we are a very unique organization that I feel does deserve inclusion on wikipedia. Not that this serves as any form of justification, but most other University Bands have wikipedia articles as well which have not been deleted.
- My concerns aren't with the content of the article; at this point it's beyond a stub. My issue is with the lack of reliable third-party sources discussing the band, which is the essence of notability on Wikipedia. Doing a Google search for the band excluding the University of Chicago website and Wikipedia, the bulk of the hits are to other scramble band websites that mention that they compete against UChicago, not any substantial coverage of it. Granted, that isn't absolute proof (perhaps some newspapers or books have written about the band), but it seems to suggest that the band isn't independently notable. Even though it may be historically connected to the obviously notable University of Chicago, notability is not inherited from connections to notable things. I would suggest that you devote your efforts to finding multiple, third-party sources that give an in-depth discussion of the band before adding more content. (Also, remember to always sign your comments on talk pages with
~~~~)— DroEsperanto (talk) 20:10, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
I noticed that this page is up for deletion, so here's my plea. Our band, unlike other bands like Princeton, has managed to stay out of the news spotlight. We are small and don't do anything stupid to attract the news. We are also completely student run, adding extra pressure on us to get noticed. So it would seem that there isn't much about us online, making us appear "less" notable. However, we (I) am trying to raise funds to purchase articles from the Chicago Tribune from 1896 to 1943 (the years the band was most active). These articles contain a good portion of the history that has since been lost even to our records. I have been in contact with publishers asking them if I can site and include their material. If this page must be deleted, I ask for a complete deletion (no merges) as I will no longer edit. Uofcband (talk) 19:45, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thank you for your comments. I'm adding them to the AFD discussion. Feel free to go there if you wish to make further comments or follow the discussion. While AFDs do close after a certain amount of time, note that all deleted pages can be undeleted by administrators if you bring up your case at WP:Deletion review, so if after the discussion a bunch of sources come up that seem to establish notability, all your hard work isn't lost. Also note that if you do find some sources, you don't need to ask the publisher's permission to cite them as a source, just if you want to include copyrighted text verbatim in large quantities (as opposed to small quotes, which are okay, more about all this at WP:REQUESTS).— DroEsperanto (talk) 20:20, 9 September 2009 (UTC)