Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/4Front

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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 11:41, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

4Front

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:MUSIC, several albums released but none have charted or were released on a major or well-known indy label. Indeed, Spec Records (see:http://www.joebergamini.com/specrecords/catalog.html#RWG) is run by a band member. Disputed prod. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 21:04, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If one clicks the contact spec records the email is "specrecords@joebergamini.com" -- I think that makes it pretty clear its run by Bergamini. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 17:36, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The references don't seem to show significant non trivial coverage. Furthermore, While the band contains one member notable as a member of another band, WP:MUSIC requires two members notable as members of another band for a band to be considered notable. Lastly, notability is not inherited, so the presence of one notable member is insufficient to keep the article. Perhaps this content could be merged to Joe Bergamini. RadManCF ☢ open frequency 21:26, 14 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this article has always seemed to me to have some circular notability issues (4front is notable because of Joe Bergamini, who is notable because of his involvement in 4front, etc). Marginal at best even with good sources, which don't seem to exist. Tim Pierce (talk) 05:53, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the article indicated that Joe Bergamini was notable ~~as a member of another band as well~~, not just as a member of 4front. RadManCF ☢ open frequency 20:47, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

He seems to have played with the notable band Happy the Man; but only on one record and when they reformed in 2005. I'm not sure if that makes him notable as a musician. However; this project clearly isnt.Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 23:57, 15 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to WP:MUSIC, his work with Happy the Man would be insufficient to establish notability. However, he has performed in some notable Broadway shows, and so would meet criterion 10, that they have performed music for a notable work of media. RadManCF ☢ open frequency

The sources for Bergamini's other work are pretty poor -- his Broadway resume is taken entirely from a short website bio that sounds like it was written by him. I do not think we have reliable sources that confirm his notability outside of Happy the Man. Tim Pierce (talk) 02:36, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i believe this is an inappropriate venue for discussing the notability of Joe Bergamini. I also wonder about this series of nominations since the nominators has been trying to remove wholesale (some referenced, some not) material from some of these pages, such as here: [1]. Tduk (talk) 04:58, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The notability of Joe Bergamini is the basis for claiming 4Front's notability. It's crucial to this discussion. Tim Pierce (talk) 11:55, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i agree but discussing it here is not the correct procedure. we have to assume he IS notable unless his article gets deleted. discussing his notability here does not involve the right people - those watching his article. we have to assume he is notable unless his article is proven otherwise at his article. if you believe he is not, go AfD that article. to argue his notability here is a sneaky way to get around wiki policies, imho. Tduk (talk) 14:52, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

@Tduk: I agree that we should assume the notability of Mr. Bergamini. @Tim Pierce: IMO, the notability of Mr. Bergamini is insufficient to establish the notability of 4front, as I explained in my !vote. RadManCF ☢ open frequency 15:29, 17 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - They seem well known enough. maybe someone can find better sources. i'm not sure about the record label being run by a band member (it looks just like a standard band order form to me, doesn't necessarily prove anything) - but it seems that one of their albums has been on several labels. Also they seem to pass by having 2 notable members (point 6)Tduk (talk) 17:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If one clicks the contact spec records the email is "specrecords@joebergamini.com" -- I think that makes it pretty clear its run by Bergamini. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 17:35, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(they also seem to pass WP:MUSIC 6 by having two notable members - jimmy wilgus and joe bergamini) Tduk (talk) 04:36, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm -- 4Front is notable because of Wilgus and Wilgus is notable because of 4Front -- that seems rather circular reasoning imo. Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 18:21, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Jimmy Wilgus's notability is confirmed only by his involvement in 4Front, and I see that is also under dispute. The very fact that it seems to be so difficult to find reliable sources to establish notability for all these people seems meaningful. Tim Pierce (talk) 04:58, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

maybe, but then we need to follow correct wikipedia procedure as i stated above, and as RadManCF agreed with me - until wilgus' article is actually deleted, we have to assume he is notable. Tduk (talk) 14:28, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. —Tduk (talk) 17:03, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This would appear to me to be mere wikilawyering -- why not actually offer an argument for notability on this page or Wilgus' for that matter? (I assume that you now no longer deny that Specrecords is run by a band member). Bigdaddy1981 (talk) 17:00, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

i do not appreciate accusations of saying we should follow policy (in ways that others agree with on here) being wikilawyering. i do not often contribute to wikipedia as i do not have the time to do so - this page is on my watchlist because i like to keep informed of things. maybe if you had notified any of the creator of this page, or any of the people who frequently edited it, you would have people actually knowledgeable enough to improve the page, instead of trying to sneakily remove cited information, no doubt in preparation to nominate pages for deletion, like you did here[2]. but i don't have the time to argue this anymore; whatever happens, will happen. Tduk (talk) 04:02, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom. If the drummer is so notable, then this band can be mentioned in his article as a side project. -- P 1 9 9 • TALK 01:06, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.