Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Danish Music Awards

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 ˉˉ^anetode╦╩ 10:34, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Danish Music Awards

It's not notable and has absolutely no references. AR Argon 02:58, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, notable major award in a major country. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps•Review?)} 03:09, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep Awards given by national affiliate of major worldwide recording industry trade association.[1][2][3] (see also da:Danish Music Awards). Wl219 03:30, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep per Wl219. Calling it nn could be seen as systematic bias. Dbromage [Talk] 03:38, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Not really - Where's the secondary reliable sources? The topic is likely notable, but there's no clear assertion of note in the article proper. MrZaius^talk 11:13, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - As pointed out, there are zero third party references or sources in the article to back up a case for note. Same goes for the Danish version. MrZaius^talk 03:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC) PS: There's a fair number of hits on Google News' archive, but they only seem to make cursory mention of the topic. Likewise, seeing very few other sources that are primarily focused on the Danish Music Awards or that give a clear basis on which to build a case for notability.[reply]
Comment. Try searching for "Dansk Grammy" too. I can't comment on the reliability of sources in Danish as I don't speak the language. Dbromage [Talk] 03:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Only see one, a subscription source that appears to only make cursory mention of the "Danish Grammies" while covering a band, like the articles I alluded to above. All hits for "Danish Grammy" seem similar. A case for note should rely on secondary, reliable sources that are primarily focused on the topic. Cursory mention doesn't really cut it, in my book, or WP:ORG - "Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability.". MrZaius^talk 11:13, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per 10 lb. Martillo. Unschool 04:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the article at Danish Wikipedia isn't stellar, but like the Tony Award and Grammy Award, besides history, the article is basically a list. ALTON .ıl 08:12, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Who says this isn't notable? I mean, really. Burntsauce 21:45, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

WP:ORG? There's no sourced assertion of notability. MrZaius^talk 23:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and expand - seems adequately notable to me; should be improved, not deleted. DWaterson 22:21, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete. The primary notability criterion is that "it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Per MrZaius, I see a lot of passing mentions (trivial), but not much which focuses directly on this topic (to fufill the notability requirements). I am only slightly persuaded by the arguments that it is inheritably notable. Daniel 00:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - national music awards seem to me to be notable per se. WjBscribe 00:35, 2 September 2007 (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.