Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/University of Michigan Men's Glee Club

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. Drmies (talk) 02:22, 22 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

University of Michigan Men's Glee Club

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

Relies mainly on self-published sources. A Google News search turns up nothing likely, and Google itself doesn't aooear to show up any good sources Mdann52 (talk) 18:44, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Michigan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:36, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:36, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:36, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Schools-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:37, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete student club at a single school, fails WP:ORG & WP:BAND. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 21:30, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep passes WP:GNG per sources in the article and this, this, this, this, this and many other hits found in a news and book search. Is calling the University of Michigan a "school" a joke? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:09, 4 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete at least for now. The sources found by Ritchie333 are either all WP:ROUTINE ("the glee club will sing at xyz on abc"), except for the last one... and the last one is WP:SPS. The second one is borderline - it interviews somebody representing another club which is hosting UofM for a concert, but it's still basically a gig list. If this were an article on a garage band, we wouldn't be having this discussion. Now, if WP:RSes can be found that cover the club and not one of the club's concerts then I'd gladly change my vote. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 13:59, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you checked the sources carefully, I'm afraid. For example, this Herald News Source clearly states "There’s a lot to be said about them. They’re one of the most prestigious and one of the oldest men’s glee clubs in the country and this is the last stop on their winter tour. They’re going to be performing several numbers. They will definitely be something to see.” WP:ROUTINE is for things like the gig guide at the back of your local paper that prints the good, bad, and terminally crap indiscriminately. Alternatively, you could try Powerful Voices: The Musical and Social World of Collegiate A Cappella pp 14-16 (University of Michigan Press, 2012, ISBN 9780472118250 - don't be fooled by the "University of Michigan", the source spends more time talking about Harvard's). And the University of Michigan's Library Press is not a self-published source, no matter how you assert otherwise. And what's wrong with redirecting to a section inside the university's article or to Glee Club (both of which are definitely notable entities), come to think of it? Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 19:08, 6 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't do that. I did check all the sources carefully before I placed my !vote. I said "The second one is borderline - it interviews somebody representing another club which is hosting UofM for a concert, but it's still basically a gig list." That's the Herald News article. I ask myself would the Herald News article be published if the concert wasn't going to happen? In this case the answer is no. It's not like a features writer said "I know, I'll write an article on the UofM Men's Glee Club!" The article is about the concert, and they are hyping the Glee Club to promote the concert, not because the club is so awesome. "The Naperville Men’s Glee Club hosts the renowned Michigan Men’s Glee Club at a concert at 7:30 p.m. Feb. 4 on the campus of North Central College in Naperville." That tells you all you need to know about this article. And please go into more detail to explain why a University Songbook, published by the University in question, containing songs sung at the University, is not a SPS? This particular reference does nothing to establish notability, in my opinion.

For the new "Powerful Voices" reference, since it's not online, assuming you have access to it, use it to improve the article, and I'll consider changing my vote. But without knowing to what extent the subject of this article is covered in that particular source, I have no indication that it's notable. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 01:49, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The "Powerful Voices" reference is online, as can be seen by clicking on the link I provided, and if you do a Google Books search using more creative terms than just the article name, you will find it and several others - "michigan glee club tour" is a particularly effective term. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 09:47, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I missed the Google preview of the Powerful Voices reference (I got lost in the big "No ebook available" text on the left side), and I agree that it could be used to source a few pieces of information for the article. That's one reference, but I still don't see "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" as required by WP:N. It's not my responsibility to do the searching and cite the article, it's the responsibility of those who assert that it's notable. Put more content into the article! ;) Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 15:10, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, go and have a look at the article now then. However, in sourcing it, I've discovered that not only do I think it passes WP:GNG, but I have also verified the club is inherently notable as it passes WP:BAND criteria #6 by having Bob McGrath, Ara Berberian and Jeff Marx (amongst others) as former members, and it passes criteria #9 by winning the Llangollen International Musical Eisteddfod - twice! Do you still want to vote "delete"? ;-) Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:29, 9 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See below. ;) Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 16:24, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:25, 7 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Per Ritchie333, and for touring internationally since 1955,and for being the oldest student organization at a world-renowned university. Edison (talk) 04:32, 8 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep-Per the excellent article/expansion of Ritchie333, not to mention the perfectly valid WP:BAND argument. Way to go! Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 16:24, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The silly thing is, the only serious problem with the article is that nobody writing it cited any sources as they were doing so. Had they done that, this article would be at GAN, not AfD! Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:02, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:28, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have finished cleaning up the article. AFAIK, absolutely everything is now sourced and I've assessed it as B-class. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 15:37, 17 September 2013 (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.