Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shapiro (band)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. Not notable enough to get past WP:BAND - yet. Black Kite 10:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Shapiro (band)

Shapiro (band) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View log)

Procedural nom. I declined to speedily delete the article, as there's a vague assertion of notability. Still, appears to be a non-notable band whose main claim to fame is performing at MACRoCk. Doesn't seem to meet WP:BAND. faithless (speak) 01:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment I'm not quite sure on this one. There are a couple of valid assertations of notability. The sources look like they're fairly in-depth, so they might meet criterion #1 of WP:MUSIC; at least one source also claims them to be well-known in their region, so #7 might apply as well. I'm going neutral for now, awaiting further comment. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 01:43, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Paul Erik (talk)(contribs) 02:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep references meet WP:MUSIC#C7. Esradekan Gibb  "Talk" 07:27, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment Let me say, that if this band does meet notability (I'm not saying they definitely don't - again, mostly a procedural nom), it would be through criteria one. I'm a frequent visitor to the Harrisonburg area, and can attest that this band is in no way the "most prominent representative of a notable style or of the local scene of a city." Not that this precludes their notability, but if they are notable, that's not why. :) Basically, the question here is: are three articles in fairly small publications (Daily News Record, Rocktown Weekly and DC Style Magazine) enough to establish this band as notable? (The Pitchfork article just lists the band as performing on a DVD and the other reference is a blog.) Cheers, faithless (speak) 08:59, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete: No record yet. Getting notice here and there, and even getting a local profile, are ephemeral. For an act to pass the bar of MUSIC, they really need to have an object, an impact, a document that can be and will be affecting things. Touring is not remarkable, even if it is a great live act or the most interesting group of people in the world. "Working on first record" means advertising and profile boosting. That's a Wikipedia NOT. Utgard Loki (talk) 14:35, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, not notable enough yet, come back after that first album is released. NawlinWiki (talk) 17:34, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep: Those that are a part of the same scene throughout the east coast consider this group to be very notable. I'm a bit confused why the artist playing MACRoCk for 3 consecutive years can't be considered as proof for notability when the festival itself has it's own wiki article. I have edited the article better describing their current recording as a "production deal". This deal and relationship is also notable. --Daniel W. White (talk) 17:58, 28 March 2008 (UTC)


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.