Latest comment: 15 years ago6 comments2 people in discussion
The Notability Template was added on 20 November 2008 by ChildofMidnight, with the edit comment "This article needs references to newspaper and magazine coverage". Does it really need, specifically, newspaper or magazine coverage to show notability? (The general notability guideline requires independent 3rd party references, but does not specifically say that they need to be from newspapers or magazines). The band are recorded artists, their music is available through mainstream sources, the band members are all known professionals (hmm, maybe I should find some independent individual band member references), and they perform in public. I've included a reference to the band's performance at Concertgebouw (which seems very notable to me), and have also now added two independent references to their CDs (and not just to their music publisher's site, as I originally had). It's hard to think what else I can add. (And if such strict requirements for proving notability are adhered to, I suspect most band and performers articles on Wikipedia would be removed - I don't think there would be any Klezmer band/musician articles left, for example). Any more specific suggestions on how I can better show notability here would be much appreciated (and I'll apply any such suggestions to other Klezmer band articles too). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:41, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
It doesn't have to be newspaper or magazine. It can be from a book or a reliable website. Sorry if my comment was confused. I was trying to be helpful. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:44, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
Thanks for your replies (here and on my Talk page). I appreciate you're trying to help me (and not suggesting the article needs deletion), and I'm grateful for it - I'm quite a new contributor and I appreciate all the help people can give me. I think the problem here is probably that the article itself doesn't contain enough material, so there isn't really enough there to reference well. I'll try to expand it with more content, which should give me more scope for finding more references. Thanks again. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:15, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
The length of the article isn't nearly as important as establishing that it's "worthy" of inclusion. It can always be expanded, but if you want it to be kept on Wikipedia it needs write ups from sources that show it's been covered and taken seriously. If they really haven't been covered at all then it may have a tough time being kept. I will have a look and see what I can find. But now that you've read up on citations, you'll have to do the heavy lifting on the referencing. I'm not any good at that. :) ChildofMidnight (talk) 07:18, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
OK, thanks again - I think I'm understanding the Notability thing a bit better now. I guess evidence that they perform and record isn't sufficient - unless other reliable sources have written about them, I guess that makes my researching and documenting their albums and performances a bit too close to original research. I'll do some more digging. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:40, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
You can include non-controversial information on the band from those sources, but establishing a subject's notability and helping editors verify an article is done with outside reliable coverage. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:29, 21 November 2008 (UTC)Reply
