 | This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2015 August 4. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
- 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. j⚛e decker talk 17:35, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
The Night Runners
 | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}}; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}}. |
- The Night Runners ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The band fails WP:BAND. Additionally they lack the significant coverage in independent reliable sources to merit an article per WP:GNG. STATic message me! 04:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps you should read A7 in the speedy deletion section as it states: It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied and any claim against the page would be inadmissible. Often what seems non-notable to a new page patroller is shown to be notable in a deletion discussion. Important note: Failing to satisfy the notability guidelines is not a criterion for speedy deletion. A mere claim of significance, even if contested, may avoid speedy deletion under A7. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 16:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Meaning just because you may not be familiar with the show "X Factor USA" , Richard Mason, or "The Night Runners" for that matter, does not grant you the right to request deletion of this page when substantial evidence and references have been cited to discredit your accusation of The Night Runners page being deleted. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 16:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
This page should not be deleted because all references have been already previously approved. All references have been well credited from reliable sources such as IMDB, and The X Factor (U.S. season 1) Wikipedia page. No content on this page violates any copyrights. All content is verifiable, and all terms and conditions are met. I kindly ask that you do not delete this page.-- Iampixiedust ( talk) 16:31, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- The problem is, IMDb is not usable as a source to give notability. It can be used to back up trivial details but does not give notability in and of itself. Being on a show doesn't automatically give notability either. It can help raise the chances of a band gaining coverage quite substantially, but if a band (or anyone or anything, for that matter) is known for one specific thing or show then we typically redirect to the show's article. We can't really use Wikipedia articles to back up notability either. Basically, IMDb and Wikipedia are usable as WP:TRIVIAL source, meaning that you can use them to back up basic details but cannot give notability. As far as the other sources go, we cannot use forum posts in any way, shape, or form except in very, very rare circumstances. (Usually the exception is that it's a post by the official person/band/organization's account and we can verify that it's them, meaning it's a WP:PRIMARY source and cannot give notability.) Now as far as the other sources go, we have two sites (Jawoco, PopTower) that are considered to be non-reliable sources per Wikipedia's guidelines. One of the biggest issues with the site is that we can't verify their editorial process or if they even have one. Many sites don't have an editorial board and/or don't have an editorial process to speak of, which would make them unusable. We also have to take into consideration whether or not the site is just basing their material off of a press release. In any case, these aren't usable as reliable sources either. What we need to show notability are sources in places such as newspaper articles, reviews of their work (in reliable, verified places like Pitchfork, AllMusic), and coverage in places that is independent of the band, their producers, their label, or X-Factor, and is considered to be a reliable, notability giving source per Wikipedia's guidelines. I just don't see where we have any usable notability giving RS on the page at all. I'll try to see what I can find, but offhand I would say that I'm leaning towards deleting this, as they're only known for participating in the early rounds of X-Factor and did not make it far enough in the competition to where they'd warrant a mention on the Wikipedia article for season 1. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:54, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. Other than the CNN Latino interview and the coverage from a local Miami station, there just isn't anything out there that would really establish notability for this band. They've performed in a few locations but not in any place that has gained them substantial coverage. They didn't make it far enough in the X-Factor competition to warrant a mention there, as they were eliminated fairly early on in the group rounds. It'd be nice if we could mention them, but the group/early elimination rounds for X-Factor (and most competition reality shows) have an extremely large amount of competitors and we can't really warrant having a list of 20-40+ people/groups that were eliminated early on. It's just far, far WP:TOOSOON for the band to have an article at this point in time. There isn't really any online buzz about them at all, not even in the fan or blog arenas, which is fairly telling. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:04, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:52, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:52, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
May i remind you that per Wikipedia Guidelines for speedy deletion you are all contesting deletion based of your opinion on notability: Important note: Failing to satisfy the notability guidelines is not a criterion for speedy deletion. A mere claim of significance, even if contested, may avoid speedy deletion under A7. --
Iampixiedust (
talk) 16:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Meaning just because you may not be familiar with "X Factor USA" or "The Night Runners" for that matter, does not grant you the right to request deletion of this page when substantial evidence and references have been cited to discredit your accusation of The Night Runners page being deleted. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 16:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment @ Iampixiedust:, this is not a speedy deletion discussion. I am not commenting on the notability of this group one way or the other, but you are misguided. Speedy deletion is just that, a process that will result in an article being deleted within minutes. This (called the Articles for Deletion process) is a full discussion on the encyclopedic merits of a topic, and unless something grievous such as copyright violation is discovered, the discussion will last a full week, possibly longer. At this point, your best option is to demonstrate exactly why this group is deserving of an encyclopedic entry. IMDb is not a reliable source, and a singular mention by a local station does not meet the General Notability Guidelines, which is our most-often-used rule-of-thumb here. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 19:26, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Keep: I "repeat", this page was already approved by another ADMIN. If there was an issue with this article to begin with, the ADMIN would have brought it up. Everything was approved and warranted the right to be included into Wikipedia. If more references are wanted, i have already gone in to provide more credible sources such as MTV and SongKick.com. However, do not delete this page. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 19:18, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment: Speaking as an admin here, there is no way for an admin to officially "approve" an article. I'm not sure where you got that idea but it's not how things work on Wikipedia. The criteria for speedy deletion are similarly irrelevant; the criteria for speedy deletion are necessarily much narrower than for deletion in general, because "speedy deletion" is "nuke on sight without discussion". If it had met the speedy criteria, we would not be discussing it here because the article would already be gone. The "articles for deletiojn" process, which is what we're engaged in right now, does take notability into consideration, specifically in this case the general notability guideline and the notability criteria for bands and musicians. — Gwalla | Talk 22:27, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
The group is deserving of an encyclopedic entry not only for their time as reality television competitors but as public figures after the show with their music career gaining attention from several publications as i have already provided. Moreover, to ease your minds and gain your satisfaction, I have provided several more credible sources such as MTV and SongKick.com. I now ask that you kindly remove the page from Articles of Deletion. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 19:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. They didn't make it far on the reality competition, and they've only released one single so far. No evidence that they are notable per WP:BAND. If the situation changes in the future, we can revisit the issue then; however, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and based on what is known right now, they are not notable and should not have an article. — C.Fred ( talk) 20:25, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
*Keep: Given that they were on television, released music, have updated publications cited (
MTV and others), i believe substantial evidence has been given that they are notable per
WP:BAND. --
CaseyJones12 (
talk) 20:50, 26 August 2014 (UTC) —
CaseyJones12 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
*Keep: I also agree, i think this Wikipedia entry carries more than enough evidence/references to stay within Wikipedia.--
Pola9847 (
talk) 01:06, 27 August 2014 (UTC) —
Pola9847 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
*Keep: Ok, i just reviewed this Wikipedia article
The Night Runners and i agree with
Pola9847,
CaseyJones12, and
Iampixiedust. This entry seems perfectly suitable within the guidelines of Wikipedia and meets the
General Notability Guidelines. Also, making irrelevant claims like what
C.Fred said: About
Wikipedia is not a crystal ball clearly shows that there is animosity towards
The Night Runners. Such comments about a Wikipedia entry are a bit ridiculous if you ask me. In the end, i see this entry as perfectly suitable to be entered in Wikipedia. --
Erickson1459 (
talk) 01:14, 27 August 2014 (UTC) —
Erickson1459 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Comment - These accounts appear to be created by the same person solely to offset the votes on this discussion. The contributions clearly speak for themselves (
here,
here, and
here).
~Oshwah~
(talk)
(contribs) 06:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- These have now been confirmed by checkuser as sockpuppets (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iampixiedust). January ( talk) 07:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment - These accounts appear to be created by the same person solely to offset the votes on this discussion. The contributions clearly speak for themselves (
here,
here, and
here).
~Oshwah~
(talk)
(contribs) 06:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete - Yes, they're a band, but it does not meet the guidelines that are focused primarily on the notability of bands. Searching for reliable sources ( see here) show that the band does not have any sort of recognition. No awards, no publication of independent articles that are redundant, and no evidence of any cultural or subjective impact. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 06:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm striking through the comments made by confirmed socks of User:Iampixiedust. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:36, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
- Correction, of User:Mason8252. User:Iampixiedust is apparently one of his socks. I will, however, leave those posts unmarked but I do want to come and note that all of the "keep" rationales were posted by socks. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:34, 30 August 2014 (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.
| This discussion was subject to a
deletion review on 2015 August 4. For an explanation of the process, see Wikipedia:Deletion review. |
- 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. j⚛e decker talk 17:35, 4 September 2014 (UTC)
The Night Runners
|
| If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}}; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}}. |
- The Night Runners ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The band fails WP:BAND. Additionally they lack the significant coverage in independent reliable sources to merit an article per WP:GNG. STATic message me! 04:03, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Perhaps you should read A7 in the speedy deletion section as it states: It is irrelevant whether the claim of notability within the article is not sufficient for the notability guidelines. If the claim is credible, the A7 tag can not be applied and any claim against the page would be inadmissible. Often what seems non-notable to a new page patroller is shown to be notable in a deletion discussion. Important note: Failing to satisfy the notability guidelines is not a criterion for speedy deletion. A mere claim of significance, even if contested, may avoid speedy deletion under A7. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 16:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Meaning just because you may not be familiar with the show "X Factor USA" , Richard Mason, or "The Night Runners" for that matter, does not grant you the right to request deletion of this page when substantial evidence and references have been cited to discredit your accusation of The Night Runners page being deleted. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 16:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
This page should not be deleted because all references have been already previously approved. All references have been well credited from reliable sources such as IMDB, and The X Factor (U.S. season 1) Wikipedia page. No content on this page violates any copyrights. All content is verifiable, and all terms and conditions are met. I kindly ask that you do not delete this page.-- Iampixiedust ( talk) 16:31, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- The problem is, IMDb is not usable as a source to give notability. It can be used to back up trivial details but does not give notability in and of itself. Being on a show doesn't automatically give notability either. It can help raise the chances of a band gaining coverage quite substantially, but if a band (or anyone or anything, for that matter) is known for one specific thing or show then we typically redirect to the show's article. We can't really use Wikipedia articles to back up notability either. Basically, IMDb and Wikipedia are usable as WP:TRIVIAL source, meaning that you can use them to back up basic details but cannot give notability. As far as the other sources go, we cannot use forum posts in any way, shape, or form except in very, very rare circumstances. (Usually the exception is that it's a post by the official person/band/organization's account and we can verify that it's them, meaning it's a WP:PRIMARY source and cannot give notability.) Now as far as the other sources go, we have two sites (Jawoco, PopTower) that are considered to be non-reliable sources per Wikipedia's guidelines. One of the biggest issues with the site is that we can't verify their editorial process or if they even have one. Many sites don't have an editorial board and/or don't have an editorial process to speak of, which would make them unusable. We also have to take into consideration whether or not the site is just basing their material off of a press release. In any case, these aren't usable as reliable sources either. What we need to show notability are sources in places such as newspaper articles, reviews of their work (in reliable, verified places like Pitchfork, AllMusic), and coverage in places that is independent of the band, their producers, their label, or X-Factor, and is considered to be a reliable, notability giving source per Wikipedia's guidelines. I just don't see where we have any usable notability giving RS on the page at all. I'll try to see what I can find, but offhand I would say that I'm leaning towards deleting this, as they're only known for participating in the early rounds of X-Factor and did not make it far enough in the competition to where they'd warrant a mention on the Wikipedia article for season 1. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 03:54, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. Other than the CNN Latino interview and the coverage from a local Miami station, there just isn't anything out there that would really establish notability for this band. They've performed in a few locations but not in any place that has gained them substantial coverage. They didn't make it far enough in the X-Factor competition to warrant a mention there, as they were eliminated fairly early on in the group rounds. It'd be nice if we could mention them, but the group/early elimination rounds for X-Factor (and most competition reality shows) have an extremely large amount of competitors and we can't really warrant having a list of 20-40+ people/groups that were eliminated early on. It's just far, far WP:TOOSOON for the band to have an article at this point in time. There isn't really any online buzz about them at all, not even in the fan or blog arenas, which is fairly telling. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 04:04, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:52, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k ( talk) 14:52, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
May i remind you that per Wikipedia Guidelines for speedy deletion you are all contesting deletion based of your opinion on notability: Important note: Failing to satisfy the notability guidelines is not a criterion for speedy deletion. A mere claim of significance, even if contested, may avoid speedy deletion under A7. --
Iampixiedust (
talk) 16:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Meaning just because you may not be familiar with "X Factor USA" or "The Night Runners" for that matter, does not grant you the right to request deletion of this page when substantial evidence and references have been cited to discredit your accusation of The Night Runners page being deleted. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 16:34, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment @ Iampixiedust:, this is not a speedy deletion discussion. I am not commenting on the notability of this group one way or the other, but you are misguided. Speedy deletion is just that, a process that will result in an article being deleted within minutes. This (called the Articles for Deletion process) is a full discussion on the encyclopedic merits of a topic, and unless something grievous such as copyright violation is discovered, the discussion will last a full week, possibly longer. At this point, your best option is to demonstrate exactly why this group is deserving of an encyclopedic entry. IMDb is not a reliable source, and a singular mention by a local station does not meet the General Notability Guidelines, which is our most-often-used rule-of-thumb here. 78.26 ( spin me / revolutions) 19:26, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Keep: I "repeat", this page was already approved by another ADMIN. If there was an issue with this article to begin with, the ADMIN would have brought it up. Everything was approved and warranted the right to be included into Wikipedia. If more references are wanted, i have already gone in to provide more credible sources such as MTV and SongKick.com. However, do not delete this page. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 19:18, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment: Speaking as an admin here, there is no way for an admin to officially "approve" an article. I'm not sure where you got that idea but it's not how things work on Wikipedia. The criteria for speedy deletion are similarly irrelevant; the criteria for speedy deletion are necessarily much narrower than for deletion in general, because "speedy deletion" is "nuke on sight without discussion". If it had met the speedy criteria, we would not be discussing it here because the article would already be gone. The "articles for deletiojn" process, which is what we're engaged in right now, does take notability into consideration, specifically in this case the general notability guideline and the notability criteria for bands and musicians. — Gwalla | Talk 22:27, 27 August 2014 (UTC)
The group is deserving of an encyclopedic entry not only for their time as reality television competitors but as public figures after the show with their music career gaining attention from several publications as i have already provided. Moreover, to ease your minds and gain your satisfaction, I have provided several more credible sources such as MTV and SongKick.com. I now ask that you kindly remove the page from Articles of Deletion. -- Iampixiedust ( talk) 19:37, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete. They didn't make it far on the reality competition, and they've only released one single so far. No evidence that they are notable per WP:BAND. If the situation changes in the future, we can revisit the issue then; however, Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and based on what is known right now, they are not notable and should not have an article. — C.Fred ( talk) 20:25, 26 August 2014 (UTC)
*Keep: Given that they were on television, released music, have updated publications cited (
MTV and others), i believe substantial evidence has been given that they are notable per
WP:BAND. --
CaseyJones12 (
talk) 20:50, 26 August 2014 (UTC) —
CaseyJones12 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
*Keep: I also agree, i think this Wikipedia entry carries more than enough evidence/references to stay within Wikipedia.--
Pola9847 (
talk) 01:06, 27 August 2014 (UTC) —
Pola9847 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
*Keep: Ok, i just reviewed this Wikipedia article
The Night Runners and i agree with
Pola9847,
CaseyJones12, and
Iampixiedust. This entry seems perfectly suitable within the guidelines of Wikipedia and meets the
General Notability Guidelines. Also, making irrelevant claims like what
C.Fred said: About
Wikipedia is not a crystal ball clearly shows that there is animosity towards
The Night Runners. Such comments about a Wikipedia entry are a bit ridiculous if you ask me. In the end, i see this entry as perfectly suitable to be entered in Wikipedia. --
Erickson1459 (
talk) 01:14, 27 August 2014 (UTC) —
Erickson1459 (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Comment - These accounts appear to be created by the same person solely to offset the votes on this discussion. The contributions clearly speak for themselves (
here,
here, and
here).
~Oshwah~
(talk)
(contribs) 06:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- These have now been confirmed by checkuser as sockpuppets (see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Iampixiedust). January ( talk) 07:53, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment - These accounts appear to be created by the same person solely to offset the votes on this discussion. The contributions clearly speak for themselves (
here,
here, and
here).
~Oshwah~
(talk)
(contribs) 06:42, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- Delete - Yes, they're a band, but it does not meet the guidelines that are focused primarily on the notability of bands. Searching for reliable sources ( see here) show that the band does not have any sort of recognition. No awards, no publication of independent articles that are redundant, and no evidence of any cultural or subjective impact. ~Oshwah~ (talk) (contribs) 06:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
- Comment: I'm striking through the comments made by confirmed socks of User:Iampixiedust. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:36, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
- Correction, of User:Mason8252. User:Iampixiedust is apparently one of his socks. I will, however, leave those posts unmarked but I do want to come and note that all of the "keep" rationales were posted by socks. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:34, 30 August 2014 (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.