Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Music In The Mountains

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 no consensus. 78.26 _{(spin me / revolutions)} 14:18, 6 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Music In The Mountains (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

A non notable local festival with no evidence of secondary sources. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. Cardiffbear88 (talk) 22:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - added several secondary sources. StrayBolt (talk) 04:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per WP:NEVENT StrayBolt has added RS. Lightburst (talk) 23:27, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The four sources currently cited are trivial coverage.

SF Examiner Image Magazine - two partial columns in a magazine that was included with the Sunday Paper. The bulk of the article covers what is occurring at the event, and has very little about why the event is important. This sort of article often appears concerning public events. The article is more like a prose listing of a schedule of events.

"The Mountains Ring With Music" (The Union) - a bit better article that covers a bit more about the series and is less of a schedule, but is still lacking in non-trivial coverage.

"Music in the Mountains announces new artistic and music director" (The Union) - The credit for this article is "Special to the Union," which is almost certainly a press release from the organization that puts on the event. Thus, it is probably a first hand source and not reliable.

"The Everything Family Guide to Northern California ...," (Book) - the mention of this Music in the Mountains occurs in a list, is brief and trivial.

Of the four sources, only "The Mountains Ring with Music" is at a stretch a support for notability. There are plenty of great events out there, not all of them are notable. I'm not sure if WP:EVENT applies here or not, this article is about a series of musical concerts, not about one event. The article needs more non-trivial WP:RS citations to prove notability. Maybe this event could be merged in to Nevada County, California? See Kate Wolf and how the Kate Wolf Memorial Concert is handled with a link to the event website. Also, it looks like High Sierra Music Festival could use some cleanup, it needs more citations. Cxbrx (talk) 19:42, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. StrayBolt added another source (thanks!), "Music in the Mountains", which describes who will be playing at the upcoming event. I see the article as trivial coverage in a fairly local newspaper, though it does help authenticate the start date. WP:PRODUCTREV #1 provides a bit of guidance here, and states "Be significant: brief and routine reviews (including Zagat) do not qualify. ... For example, a review of a local harvest festival in a local newspaper or a book review in a newsletter by a city's library would not qualify as significant coverage." The bulk of the coverage seems to be local, though there was the SF Examiner magazine notice. See also WP:ROUTINE, "Per Wikipedia policy, routine news coverage of such things as announcements, sports, speculative coverage, and tabloid journalism are not sufficient basis for an article. Planned coverage of scheduled events, especially when those involved in the event are also promoting it, is considered to be routine." There does seem to be many similar articles with notability issues, see Category:Event articles with topics of unclear notability. In summary, I don't have strong feelings about this, the entire category is a bit of a mess. I appreciate StrayBolt's efforts and realize that we probably have a mild difference of opinion. It would be great to see input from another editor who evaluate the article including the new sources with regard to WP:EVENT. Cxbrx (talk) 14:48, 24 March 2020 (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.