The result was no consensus. The accurate summary of the discussion is probably that the users do not agree on whether the available coverage is sufficient, with the majority on the keep side-- Ymblanter ( talk) 07:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
PROD removed from creator of page. Non-notable band that lacks in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Meatsgains ( talk) 03:15, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I want to note now that I have made many improvements to the article since it was proposed for deletion. These include: updating and providing verification of sources of critical appreciation (and please note that there was much good press, especially in Europe, that can’t be cited because it is not online); I added an infobox, as well as two graphics; I bolstered the external references; I cleaned up any of the comments that seemed whimsical (such as in the bios), making the article more factual in tone; I added the page to categories. I hope you find these improvements sufficient to a have the considered for deletion tag removed. I would add with regard to the significance of the band, that three full LP/CD’s are in circulation, as well as one EP; that they were at the level of playing Saturday night headliners in Manhattan clubs such as CBGB and The Knitting Factory for years; and that according to my communication with band members, they are collaborating again, and making plans to release new music in the near future (noted in the singer’s biographical details). If there are any other improvements that you might suggest, I am certainly receptive. I do plan to contact other similar bands who have pages on Wikipedia to link to this page, but after the deletion tag is removed. Thank you for your consideration. Bettina F. Rage ( talk) 16:14, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
{{
Refimprove|section}}
, and suggest it be cut if it can't be sourced to
WP:42. I've added a few {{
cite book}}s, nothing fantastic. It is maybe another one of these cases were a short-lived band quit before the mid-90's rise of the World Wide Web, and sources may be available in print, but not (yet) digitized.
Sam Sailor
Talk! 18:24, 15 May 2016 (UTC)It is a very valid point that much of the buzz that surrounded the "New York rock scene" and this particular band pre-dated the digital age, and therefore is lost. Encouraging reviews, particularly in European music mags (e.g. Sounds, Melody Maker, NME) are not being cited because they’re not online, although material copies exist, of course. However, I would argue that if it’s a question of verifying the existence and the reception of the band, we have the citation of a positive review in the East Village Eye (a well-regarded paper of that time) of the debut performance, and then the New York Times article locates the band in the midst of a promising underground scene of the time, after the release of the first LP. Ivan’s participation in Swans and on the album Greed can be verified on the album’s Wikipedia page. The Trouser Press article has been verified above. The albums, which are still available, verify their status, as well. All the other reviews cited, plus the fact that now, in this digital age, there is a fan page for the band on Facebook, and the news which may or may not be relevant that band members are making music together again, hopefully will persuade you and readers that the band existed and was appreciated, and deserves a place in Wikipedia. In any case I am grateful for all the assistance in improving the article. Bettina F. Rage ( talk) 17:38, 16 May 2016 (UTC)
The result was no consensus. The accurate summary of the discussion is probably that the users do not agree on whether the available coverage is sufficient, with the majority on the keep side-- Ymblanter ( talk) 07:21, 23 May 2016 (UTC)
PROD removed from creator of page. Non-notable band that lacks in-depth coverage in reliable sources. Meatsgains ( talk) 03:15, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
I want to note now that I have made many improvements to the article since it was proposed for deletion. These include: updating and providing verification of sources of critical appreciation (and please note that there was much good press, especially in Europe, that can’t be cited because it is not online); I added an infobox, as well as two graphics; I bolstered the external references; I cleaned up any of the comments that seemed whimsical (such as in the bios), making the article more factual in tone; I added the page to categories. I hope you find these improvements sufficient to a have the considered for deletion tag removed. I would add with regard to the significance of the band, that three full LP/CD’s are in circulation, as well as one EP; that they were at the level of playing Saturday night headliners in Manhattan clubs such as CBGB and The Knitting Factory for years; and that according to my communication with band members, they are collaborating again, and making plans to release new music in the near future (noted in the singer’s biographical details). If there are any other improvements that you might suggest, I am certainly receptive. I do plan to contact other similar bands who have pages on Wikipedia to link to this page, but after the deletion tag is removed. Thank you for your consideration. Bettina F. Rage ( talk) 16:14, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
{{
Refimprove|section}}
, and suggest it be cut if it can't be sourced to
WP:42. I've added a few {{
cite book}}s, nothing fantastic. It is maybe another one of these cases were a short-lived band quit before the mid-90's rise of the World Wide Web, and sources may be available in print, but not (yet) digitized.
Sam Sailor
Talk! 18:24, 15 May 2016 (UTC)It is a very valid point that much of the buzz that surrounded the "New York rock scene" and this particular band pre-dated the digital age, and therefore is lost. Encouraging reviews, particularly in European music mags (e.g. Sounds, Melody Maker, NME) are not being cited because they’re not online, although material copies exist, of course. However, I would argue that if it’s a question of verifying the existence and the reception of the band, we have the citation of a positive review in the East Village Eye (a well-regarded paper of that time) of the debut performance, and then the New York Times article locates the band in the midst of a promising underground scene of the time, after the release of the first LP. Ivan’s participation in Swans and on the album Greed can be verified on the album’s Wikipedia page. The Trouser Press article has been verified above. The albums, which are still available, verify their status, as well. All the other reviews cited, plus the fact that now, in this digital age, there is a fan page for the band on Facebook, and the news which may or may not be relevant that band members are making music together again, hopefully will persuade you and readers that the band existed and was appreciated, and deserves a place in Wikipedia. In any case I am grateful for all the assistance in improving the article. Bettina F. Rage ( talk) 17:38, 16 May 2016 (UTC)