Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NYPD Pipes and Drums

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Ostrichyearning3 (talk) 20:05, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NYPD Pipes and Drums (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)

No independent notability. Ostrichyearning3 (talk) 18:45, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:13, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:13, 20 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for pointing that out, it's certainly more than a routine appearance. There could be a useful article about the band on wikipedia, I'm happy to withdraw the nom and do some work on it if you think it's marginal? Most of the pipe band articles that have been AfDed have been much less notable so there's not much consensus on where the line is for pipe bands. Ostrichyearning3 (talk) 19:24, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ran a Proquest news archive search and can see articles from papers across the U.S. and Canada about this band marching in parades, and giving concerts. Some of it is minor, Traveling to give concerts is something bands do, Washington for the Inaugural parade and so forth, could be summarized in a sentence sourced to articles about major gigs. Obits for a long-time band conductor. founding date in article is probably incorrect it seems to be the starting date for a particular conductor, but band appears to have existed already. As I said, this one clearly just needs an editor to write and source it. I'll try to get back to it. access to news archives is really useful here - lots of old articles to comb through.E.M.Gregory (talk) 02:17, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sam Sailor 05:20, 28 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good, cheers for the input!! I'll withdraw the nomination. Ostrichyearning3 (talk) 20:04, 28 November 2018 (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.