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 delete. PhilKnight (talk) 14:03, 22 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of bands named after places[edit]

List of bands named after places (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

I've been unable to verify most of these. Some are no-brainers (e.g. Alabama, the band, so named because they were founded by four people from Fort Payne, Alabama), but others are less obvious. Was Sugarland really named for a place? Were they named after Sugar Land, Texas, The Sugarlands, or what? Et cetera. This is just original research and trivia. And don't get me started on the red links. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Non notable list. Unverified claims. Original research etc... Fails WP:V in some areas. The last AfD had opinions like "I've been looking for a list like this" or "Interesting enough". That doesn't cut it. Undeath (talk) 00:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, indiscriminate information even if sourced, and a trivial intersection of topics. Bands from a place is an encyclopedic list, but this is basically trivia. --Dhartung | Talk 01:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete, at least until we rename the project trivipedia. This is WP:OR and certainly not encyclopedic.  Frank  |  talk  01:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete A victim of its own success. It was nominated shortly after its creation in April 2006, and one of the comments in favor of keep was "This list isn't a list of one-eyed horse thieves from Montana, it's about bands like Chicago, Boston, Alabama, and Japan.". Since then, however, it's grown from perhaps 50 well-known bands ("like Chicago, Boston, Alabama") to hundreds of entries (bands like Calexico, Enon, Missouri). Maybe those are famous bands, maybe not, who's to say, and that's the point. Wikipedia's criteria for a notable band is low enough that if they signed a recording contract with a major label, they get a page, even if they aren't . That which isn't obvious (Kansas was named after the American state of... man, it was right on the tip of my tongue) is just trivia (Cinder Road is "the road in Timonium, Maryland"). No longer interesting enough to be appealing, too much chaff and not enough wheat. Now it's just a dust magnet, but might be a good category on $25,000 Pyramid. Mandsford (talk) 01:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete that this wasn't deleted the first time around is a bit of a mystery. JuJube (talk) 02:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Interesting concept. It could be useful and does no harm to anyone. But why do a bunch of Englishmen have the right to name their band "Japan"? Steve Dufour (talk) 02:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:NOHARM. JuJube (talk) 04:31, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Non notable list, per Voooooooooooor.  Esradekan Gibb  ^"Talk" 02:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unsourced and likely ORed list of trivia. – sgeureka ^t•c 10:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete is where I'm coming down on this one. Maybe the bands are notable, maybe the places are notable... but there is no reason I can see to have a correlation between the two.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Speedy keep due to clear consensus to keep in first discussion and per Wikipedia:Lists (discriminate, encyclopedic, maintainable, notable, unoriginal, and verifiable). --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 18:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Consensus can change, and it seems to have here. "A previous AfD from more than a year ago was closed as Keep" is not valid Speedy Keep criteria. JuJube (talk) 19:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • If that were the case then we would not have such closes as the one discussed at User_talk:A_Man_In_Black#Burning_Up_Tour_AfD. Plus, the topic does get hits. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:21, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:NOTDIR #5 ("non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations"). Deor (talk) 19:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • A list of an encyclopedic subject does not make us a directory. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Lists are an important part of an encylopedia, and this one is no less trivial than many others. MarkSG (talk) 19:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Indiscriminate collection of information. The link between criterion and candidates is far too weak to warrant an article, and the scope is likely ridiculous. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article is discriminate in that it has a clear inclusion criteria and organization. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 00:51, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  Roi's right that it isn't an indiscriminate list. It's still a mix of the obvious and the trivial, but it's not indiscriminate. Mandsford (talk) 01:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. And improve sourcing through regular editing. As nom says some are obvious but other are not; clarify and source. A list of notable bands, as defined because each has their own article is only so interesting to me but my taste is hardly a reason to keep or delete. If we have proof that no one is interested I would be more compelled but this does seem to be a useful list to those who are curious as well as those who study these things as part of their music-related professions. Banjeboi 00:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Um ... who cares? I'm bright enough to know that "Alabama" has the same name as the state. It's far too trivial. BMW(drive) 22:42, 21 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Please see Wikipedia:WHOCARES. Obviously those who created, worked on, and argued to keep across two AfDs care. I believe this article serves a great navigational, table of contents esque function. Moreover, the topic itself is covered in a variety of sources as well: [1], [2], etc, which means it is verifiable, unoriginal research, and because it is in multiple reliable secondary sources, meets our notability guidelines. --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 23:42, 21 August 2008 (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.