User talk:JonChesterfield/The Forbidden 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Speedy deletion

This article should remain available on Wikipedia for a number of reasons.

The question of the subject's notability being the reason cited for its deletion, it is countered that because it is indeed a stub, it should be allowed the time to be "fleshed out", so said notability can be presented and verified. The majority of Wikipedia articles are not produced in-full upon creation, but instead allowed to develop over time.

The subject is notable for its choice of subject matter, and its connection to the local horror film and music scene. In addition, one member of the group itself was previously a member of another local band which experienced distinctive acclaim. Both of these facts shall be elaborated upon as reasonable verifiable reference becomes available.

Contesting of the proposed deletion of this article is also based on the following: the article created for this subject is actually more expansive than similar articles (see The Ghastly Ones, which was almost cited as a similar band), which have been allowed to stay posted without the suggestion of deletion. To compare more directly, The Forbidden 5 may not have the same degree of acclaim or popularity as certain other bands, but this does not in and of itself make them any less worthy of inclusion for those seeking information about them.

The Forbidden 5 article contains a similar (if not slightly more expansive) amount of content to the entry on Grant Street, which is an article that is also primarily of local interest, yet allowed to stay posted. Care was also taken to present information about the group using Wikipedia's NPOV, rather than as a vanity article.

Lastly, it is hoped that this user's ongoing dedication toward Wikipedia's guidelines and criteria for articles will be allowed to continue with this specific entry. --JonChesterfield 13:06, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• Citing another, similar, article's inclusion, despite its lack of notability, is not grounds for inclusion. Nothing has been cited that makes this band stand out from countless other bands of the same ilk, and wikipedia should not merely be a placeholder until something becomes notable (or claims become verifiable). As a (crude) measure - google:"The+Forbidden+5"-myspace-wikipedia returns very few results. :: Princess Tiswas 14:24, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• The Ghastly Ones makes no assertion of notability either, so I have tagged it for speedy deletion aswell. Look at WP:BAND to see what qualifies as notability. Please note that to prevent the speedy deletion you need only cliam notability. However to avoid deletion by the slower discussion method evidence of this notability needs to be provided. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 14:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• • I agree that Wikipedia shouldn't be used as a placeholder. However, I wasn't asking to be allowed to wait until the subject becomes notable or the article's claims become verifiable. My assertion is that the subject is already notable (though the degree of which may be subjective) under at least two of the examples given under Wikipedia's Notability (music) guidelines. I'm merely asking that I (or others) be given the time to emebllish the article and provide that claim of notability, which I believe is reasonable. The purpose of including a "stub" flag seems to me to allow contributors this time. And not to harp on this, but the Ghastly Ones article was allowed (or managed) to exist for several months without such embellishment before being tagged for "speedy" deletion. Is it too much to ask for more than a few minutes for this one? In the case of an article that doesn't include objectionable material, nor flagrantly violate Wikipedia's principles - and if anything is trying to adhere to them - a "speedy deletion" seems harsh. --JonChesterfield 15:08, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• If you like, I can move it to your userspace until you are done. Then you can work on it till it is up to standards, just ask me too. I am a little confused, which part of the article claims notability? HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 15:11, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

• • I accept your suggestion, and appreciate the offer. The notability claim I will be elaborating on is the history of the band's frontman, in relation to other bands he has been involved with. Also, the distinctive Pittsburgh connection with the monster-movie genre will be included. After re-examining the article, the omission of these key facts is more apparent. --JonChesterfield 16:10, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Moved to userspace

Ok people this has been moved to the userspace until it meets criteria. Let me know if you need any help moving it back once it is ready. HighInBC ^{(Need help? Ask me)} 16:32, 24 November 2006 (UTC)