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. MBisanz ^talk 05:35, 16 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Tarkio (band)

[edit]

No references, fails WP:MUSIC Dlabtot (talk) 17:11, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

or redirect/merge with The Decemberists. Dlabtot (talk) 17:12, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk 19:00, 6 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, one rated review at Allmusic; [1], and another at Pitchfork Media; [2] for the album Omnibus means it meets WP:MUSIC#C1 for multiple non-trivial published works. While I will be the first to agree that Colin Meloy is better known for his work with The Decemberists, I reckon there is enough to warrant a stand alone article. If the commumitty doesn't agree I then reckon add the ref's from above, and merge the lot into the Colin Meloy#Musical career section. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 01:14, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe those sources are valid for establishing notability. Dlabtot (talk) 01:51, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How so? Allmusic & Pitchfork are considered as credible published materials, with a reliable publication process; their authors are generally regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the context of music. Both are written by staff writers, and are therefore independent of the subject. The subject is completely about the band or their works, and thus isn't trivial. There are 2 of them, and thus multiple mentions. To me that is the exact definition of WP:MUSIC#C1. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 02:28, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There have been extensive discussions of allmusic at WP:RSN. I do consider them a fairly reliable source for information, but they are not a traditional source that publishes only about notable musicians or recordings. They do indeed strive to cover ALL MUSIC, and therefore an appearance there is not an indication of notability. My opinion of pitchfork is not as well informed so I will leave that discussion to others. Dlabtot (talk) 03:06, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That may be so, (re. the discussions aboot Allmusic), but until such time as people stop talking about it, and actually do something, Allmusic still stands as a reliable source per Wikipedia:Music#Resources. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 01:04, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pitchfork Media is pretty much the grand poobah of indie music journalism. Additionally, Metacritic [3] indicates a review from Spin, but I don't know if it's substantial or just a mini-blurb of a review. Poechalkdust (talk) 08:21, 10 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 00:13, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Really quite notable, with plenty of coverage if one digs deep enough, ranging from substantial coverage to briefer mentions - plenty to allow a decently-sourced article: [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12]--Michig (talk) 16:57, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

~~Those mostly aren't~~ None of those links are coverage of the band Tarkio, they are reviews of the retrospective Omnibus. There were a lot of reviews of Omnibus, and it is true that a fraction of them were published in reliable sources. However, a careful examination of those reviews will support the notion that Tarkio's only claim to notability is the fact that the frontman went on to greater success with The Decemberists. Dlabtot (talk) 17:27, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

With all due respect, reviews of a band's work are coverage of the band, and the band has sufficient claim to notability as they have received significant coverage in reliable sources. Criterion 1 of WP:MUSIC is satisfied by the coverage and the Decembrists link also passes criterion 6. The information in the article could be merged into Colin Meloy, but there is probably enough to be said about the band to make a separate article justified. A discussion of whether the content should be merged is a separate matter to whether it should be deleted. Merge or not, the subject of the article is sufficiently encyclopedic to be included here.--Michig (talk) 17:42, 12 April 2009 (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.