- Jesse James (band) (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)
<Jesse James were a significant band on the UK punk scene from 2000 to 20007. There is a lot of press to substantiate this. We believe this page was maliciously deleted. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vchdlFSYgOM> https://itunes.apple.com/gb/album/mission/61643653 92.232.169.228 (talk) 10:33, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse A YouTube of questionable copyright that only links to a song and a listing on iTunes do not establish notability and evidence-free accusations of malice are unacceptable anyway. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 11:14, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I don't fully understand how all this works. The page of my old band Jesse James was deleted, apparently for no real reason and given the band's significance on the UK punk scene at the time this seems wrong. You make some comment about "dubious copyright" in regard to a video on youtube legitimately posted by our erstwhile record label. Why dubious? That's an ill informed statement. There appears to have been zero research done before deleting the page.
Further evidence of the existence of the band:
- http://music.wikia.com/wiki/Jessy_James_(band)
- http://drownedinsound.com/artists/Jesse_James
- https://rateyourmusic.com/artist/jesse_james
- http://www.punktastic.com/bands/jesse-james-2/
- https://www.amazon.co.uk/Punk-Soul-Brothers-Jesse-James/dp/B00006J9L0
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vchdlFSYgOM
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nxN4X1E7OWc
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jZB8IAftehg
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6mQcHm2SDZk
- https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3qaozC1KBAE
- https://www.discogs.com/artist/1075835-Jesse-James-11
- 92.232.169.228 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 14:26, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: I have reformatted the above list purely for readability -- RoySmith (talk) 15:19, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The existence of the band is not in question, as far as I can tell. The article was deleted because it did not demonstrate the notability of the band. Significant press coverage would demonstrate notability (see WP:BAND), so can you provide details of that coverage? Cordless Larry (talk) 14:32, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- For the record, the problem with the Youtube link is that posting someone else's song on Youtube without permission can be considered copyright infringement, and there was no indication that this video was posted by an official source or anything. I also note that Wikia and Discogs are user generated wikis hence not reliable sources and Youtube videos are self-published sources hence neither contributes to "notability" as we define it. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 14:41, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia uses a concept called Notability to determine if we should have an article on a given topic or not. Simply verifying that something exists, while a requirement, isn't enough. The rules get complicated and arcane sometimes, but the gist of it is, If other reliable, independent, third-party sources are writing about the topic, in sufficient quantify, then it's notable. The following should fill in some details:
- WP:GNG, our general guidelines for what we consider notable
- WP:BAND, more specific guidelines that apple to bands
- WP:RS, guidelines on what we consider to be reliable sources
- Thanks. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:28, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- PS, I'll call this, Endorse on merits, but... with so little discussion, I would have closed this as WP:SOFTDELETE, in which case, WP:REFUND would apply. But, given that the sources presented here are all youtube and similar first-party sites, I can't get too worked up over that. If somebody could dig up a couple of WP:RS, then we should restore this, or at least relist it. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:38, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- And, also, please read WP:AGF, regarding the maliciously deleted comment. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:41, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
|
