Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thunderthighs
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 keep. Canley (talk) 01:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
[edit] Thunderthighs
This backup group appears to be thoroughly unnotable. Delete. --Nlu (talk) 06:05, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep being the backing ensemble to a tune like Lou Reed's "Walk on the Wild Side" is sufficiently notable. Chubbles (talk) 08:55, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- Weak delete. All Music Guide entry gives nothing to suggest notability (no discography), and notability is not inherited despite having worked with several famous artists, rendering Chubbles' keep rationale invalid if I'm not mistaken. No reliable sources. Also, doesn't need a dicdef for the slang term "thunderthighs", which actually hinders searching for reliable sources about this band. To be honest, I think any sources would be trivial.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 19:00, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Russavia (talk) 19:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
Delete. Lack of multiple reliable sources to suggest notability. Fails WP:Music.♫ Cricket02 (talk) 15:52, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- Change to Keep per Phil Bridgers evidence of an independent charted single.[1] Passes WP:Music. ♫ Cricket02 (talk) 14:39, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- Keep. This seems so obvious that I find it difficult to give an argument other that "it's obvious". Walk on the Wild Side is a canonical recording, and the backing vocals are one of the main elements of it. Who can listen to it without rembering "Doo-da-doo-doo-da-doo doo-da-doo-doo-doo-da-doo doo-da-doo-doo-da-doo doo-da-doo-doo-doo-da-doo doooo" (cue Ronnie Ross's saxophone solo). For more objective evidence look at a Google search for 'Thunderthighs +"walk on the wild side"', which, for a subject from 35 years ago, shows a pretty impressive result. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:35, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
- How does this suggest independent notability? The song is notable. That doesn't mean that the backup group associated with the song is notable. For example, Summer of '69 is notable, and you're going to find a lot of references to the friends that Bryan Adams referred to in the song (Jimmy and Jody), but that doesn't make those friends themselves notable even though they are fairly established as far as their identity is concerned. At the absolute best scenario, consider Huey Lewis & The News. Lewis is independently notable. The News is not, and there is no separate article for the News. --Nlu (talk) 01:21, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- Comment. Ok, I'll admit that my previous statement was more of an WP:ILIKEIT than a policy/guideline based argument, but what does get them through the guidelines (specifically WP:MUSIC#Criteria for musicians and ensembles criterion 2) is that they reached number 30 in the UK charts with their own single. Phil Bridger (talk) 10:28, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- How does this suggest independent notability? The song is notable. That doesn't mean that the backup group associated with the song is notable. For example, Summer of '69 is notable, and you're going to find a lot of references to the friends that Bryan Adams referred to in the song (Jimmy and Jody), but that doesn't make those friends themselves notable even though they are fairly established as far as their identity is concerned. At the absolute best scenario, consider Huey Lewis & The News. Lewis is independently notable. The News is not, and there is no separate article for the News. --Nlu (talk) 01:21, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
- keep per Phil's comment above. Reaching 30 on the UK chart makes them meet WP:MUSIC. JoshuaZ (talk) 19:20, 12 February 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.
