Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subkulture

:{{la|Subkulture}} ([{{fullurl:Subkulture|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Subkulture}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Fails wp:corp. Term gets hits unrelated to this company. Claims to be in biz since 95, yet says it was only a concept in 95. Regardless, not notable. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 01:14, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

• Delete no reliable source to establish notability.--Boffob (talk) 01:32, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
• Keep Needs references. They have an annual event. Has some history. Seemed interesting enough. ChildofMidnight (talk) 03:19, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

:*Comment It might be WP:interesting, but that isn't the policy, CORP is. Which criteria of WP:CORP does it pass in order to be kept? DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 03:22, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

:::Comment It's hard for me to argue with a reggae great. But I suggest tagging it with references needed. Based on the content of the article I believe it's notable. Around since 1995, international presence. Here's an event http://bandscapes.multiply.com/calendar/item/10391 they put on. But like I said, it needs references. So I think addressing that would be the appropriate Template to do, rather than a straight delete. I really want to give a youtube link to some of your tunes, but I will restrain myself... ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:08, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

:::: A couple of links from reliable sources would go a long way in convincing me, much more so than youtube. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 11:23, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

• Delete I can find no references via the tri-state (ND, MN, SD) libruary book/periodical database, Google comes up with nothing related to this company, only unrelated items. That's enough for me to say 'bye bye' to this article. --Brian_{(view my history)}/^{(How am I doing?)} 15:23, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
• Keep I am adding this comment that was put on the discussion page unsigned. It clearly indicates a "Keep" vote and that the editor who wrote it is working to address the concerns expressed here and to add references.

::"hello everyone,i attached some reputable mainstream publications that have reviewed and covered our events as reference. we couldnt get our hands on old TV archives at the moment in connection to the benefit shows we've pushed to fight against poverty. i will do my best to add more on the references area. thank you for your patience and support sirs.

:Retrieved from 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_deletion/Subkulture'" Yes, I recognize there may be an issue of conflict of interest. But again, I suggest we focus on educating this editor and the others involved in writing this article instead of straight deleting it. ChildofMidnight (talk) 16:04, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

Comment Sorry, I may not have formatted that correctly and clearly. There was a comment on the talk page of this AfD page. So I was just trying 1) move it here 2) indicate the vote the editor was indicating 3) provide the context and explanation for my actions. I'm sorry it wasn't clearer. The second "keep" was theirs. It seems they are having difficulty navigating Wikipedia and posting in the correct place with the correct format. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:41, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

::In the rare cases I move a !vote (very rare), I do it with a heading explaining the source of the text, so the admin can give the appropriate weight, in their opinion. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 17:50, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

• Comment Subkulture is a Philipino record live music event company for goth music. They have an international presence and do shows in Manila, SF and NY. They've been around for years. Here's a website http://www.soundclick.com/bands/default.cfm?bandID=177815 with an article talking about how another band got a big break by being chosen to be part of their international shows. "June 2003 was a break for Sea of Rains as Subkulture Productions decided to include them in their roster of regular bands to play in their events, including Klub Gargoyle (a regular gothic event), Faces of Rock (an event featuring a mix of various rock bands), and Children of Shadows (a mixed dark music event). This gave Sea of Rains the chance to share the stage with the likes of their most respected artists like Dahong Palay, Death by Stereo, and Philippine goth rock icons Dominion.June 28 was the night of the first out-of-town tour for the band: Klub Gargoyle Baguio. Here they played with Dominion and The Late Isabel in a jam-packed Cactus Bar". There is obviously a language barrier gap here, but the editors involved are trying to respond and to address the concerns being discussed. That being said, I see clear evidence of notability and references (albeit not great ones, which is no surprise for a Philipino record label/ production company). ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:11, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

::The best way to convince me is by adding content and sources that pass wp:rs to the actual article that show notability, in this case, under wp:corp. In other words, to change anyone's vote, it is best to do a WP:HEY improvement to the article first, then just tell us to compare diffs to before the AFD. Until it is in black and white, it is theoretical. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 18:25, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

:::A good suggestion. I added an inline citation for the quote I mentioned in my above comment. I also found two articles discussing Subkulture that another editor had already added to the article, but they didn't do it properly so it was invisible. It's still not up to standard, but they look like good references. Have a look. ChildofMidnight (talk) 18:31, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

::::um, I removed the one 'imageshack' reference. They can not be used for either a reliable source or even an external link in this case. I wouldn't really call this a WP:HEY job. The last WP:HEY job I did was this one, here are the before and after dif [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Frank_Hammond&diff=250028592&oldid=249026161]. It was barely enough to be a HEY job, and you can likely see there is a pretty big difference in the quality of sources and info (not quantity, but quality). DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 20:22, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

:::::Regarding the Frank Hammond article, I didn't see any references to third party media coverage. I also had some issues with the way that article was written, for example the inclusion of linked ISBN numbers, which seems like an attempt to advertise product.

:::::In contrast this article includes references to third party reviews and interviews discussing Subkulture's role in goth shows and Philippino goth music culture. It's a subject I have zero interest in, but other than needing some rewriting, I think the article passes the appropriate requirements for inclusion in this encyclopedia. I would also note that the authors of the Subkulture article have shown an interest in improving it and making it meet the standards, which I think counts for a lot in my book. I'm not sure why you are so adamantly opposed to the article? But I respect your opinion, even as I disagree. ChildofMidnight (talk) 20:52, 7 November 2008 (UTC)

::::::It has multiple reliable sources. It gets 9 hits on Google scholar. There was a University that has it on their "suggested reading" for a course, which is considered ok for WP:RS as they are independent of him and their suggestion implies importance, and it was sourced back to the official university website. The ISBN's don't advertise and can be traced down to libraries in many countries that have the books and are absolutely reliable as they are sourced from the library of congress on down to verify who wrote what. It is hard to get more "reliable" than the ISBN and this is accepted as "not advertising". IMO, this article barely passes, and this guy is a best selling author. I even brought in a professional librarian (with a MLS from Rutgers) who is an admin here, DGG and got his opinion in the matter. This wasn't my article, it was just one I was saving from PROD, only because no one else would. I don't even agree with his religion or philosophy. I still wish I could have gotten more good sources, as the main book was written in 1973, and most stuff published before the web doesn't have reviews on the web, but this was the best I could find over a few hours of researching multiple sources. And the one source doesn't pass wp:rs, but it is there to be informative, not to verify. You might be underestimating the amount of effort I took to save, source, verify and get independent verification of MY verification, to insure that it passed the guidelines, and that I was confident that most editors and admin's would agree with my assessement if it went to AFD. This is what I call a WP:HEY job, and I showed you this one because it is my worst example. Please don't take this the wrong way, but in terms of "quality" of sources, there is no comparison. Of course, you are free to send it to AFD if you disagree. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 00:39, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

• Keep hello gentlemen, im sorry for all the hassle, im still trying to find my way around wikipedia. i appreciate your help and concern, i am still trying to gather some mainstream publications that have covered subkulture events, we have a japanese magazine that flew to the philippines to cover our activities and shows, its in japanese though and i can scan the magazine and maybe upload it if that would be of assistance. i will wait for your advise. thank you again. we have requested the tv company to send us a copy of their coverage also but it will look like it is going to be delayed due to the management processes,rest assured i will do my best to provide some proper reference for consideration. again thank you for your time Sirs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchtower666 (talk • contribs) 21:33, 7 November 2008 (UTC)
• — Watchtower666 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. {{ #if: | The preceding unsigned comment was added at {{{2}}} (UTC).}}
• Update The article has been substantially improved since first being nominated. It has several references and at least one editor is working on getting more. Subject seems to be notable and well established. ChildofMidnight (talk) 00:14, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
• Sorry The links mention the company, but there isn't a single source that is independent of them that is talking ABOUT them. WP:CORP kinda insists on more. IE: The depth of coverage of the subject by the source must be considered. If the depth of coverage is not substantial, then multiple independent sources should be cited to establish notability. Trivial or incidental coverage of a subject by secondary sources is not sufficient to establish notability. In short, the article doesn't even make a claim of WHY they are notable, and the sources don't either. In this case, I am 100% convinced you have done the best that can be expected, but in the end, the reason you weren't able to demonstrate notability isn't from a lack of effort, but rather from the fact that the company exists but isn't notable. You tried. It isn't your fault. They exist, they are small, they throw a great party, help record some stuff, but they aren't notable yet. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 00:51, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
• CommentThere are actually several sources in the article that cover this promotion company and artistic label. More are promised by the editor who has been helpful and cooperative up to this point. I suggest you take a look at: http://www.darkasia.com/downloads/EDW5_WestCoastReport.pdf one of the references he/she provided. It's substantial independent story on "Subkulture's All Hollows Gothic Ball 5". That's just one example, and it most certainly counts as a valid reference. Again, I'm not sure why you are so adamant this article be deleted. It's about an organization with a 20 year history of substantial events that have recieved independent media coverage. What gives? ChildofMidnight (talk) 01:40, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

:* Is it your claim that http://www.darkasia.com/ passes WP:RS? What about http://www.soundclick.com ? http://bandscapes.multiply.com? What about http://www.rakista.com ? I am not against the article, it is that I am not convinced that the consensus at Wikipedia would agree that these pass WP:RS, which is required to pass WP:V. Since there is no claim of actual notability, it is also required to establish notablity. They look like great sites, perfectly informative and interesting. Most are very member driven, which is exactly the opposite of WP:RS. To give you another example, http://www.imdb.com is a killer site, I love it, insanely useful, and utterly fails WP:RS. You are free to disagree, it isn't personal at all. I admire the work you have done on the article, but if I waited another day, or another week, or another year, I am confident that the result would be the same. I keep quoting policies because I am getting the sneaky feeling you aren't actually *reading* them, or not reading them objectively. It isn't personal (I actually like the fact that you will fight when you think you are right). It is that I am pretty confident in my interpretations, and I treat all articles the same. I may ask someone I know to look here and give an opinion, just to check my logic. The people I call "friends" here are the kind of people that will tell me that I am wrong if I am wrong. I have no use for people who agree with me just to get along. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 02:36, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

• I asked an editor, TenPoundHammer, who is pretty authorative about bands and reliable sources. While this is a corp, I think his perspective would benefit us both. He isn't an admin, but he has more experience than most, and I know he will give an honest opinion, whether or not he agrees with me. He usually will comply with a request like this, although he knows it is ok with me if he decides to bow out. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 02:42, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

:Comment I'm not sure another editor's opinion is needed. The article has been substantially improved with references, it's been categorized, and the content has been cleaned up significantly. They've recieved media coverage in established and alternative press and have been around for years. I suggest you click on the "Goth Rock" category at the bottom of Subkulture's page and hunt for a better target for deletion. This is an internationally recognized organization that is clearly notable to the many fans of Philipino Goth Rock. ChildofMidnight (talk) 02:49, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

::Keep in mind, I am only one opinion. I am not an admin. I am just some guy that took the time to explain in detail, and tried to help establish notability, but couldn't, and cared enough to try to help you understand why I !voted delete. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 02:55, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Philippines-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:04, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:04, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 05:04, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

:Comment Hello, i've uploaded some links to the Japanese Magazine Burst, who came to manila to cover Subkulture and it's event, also for flying in Japanese gothic legend haruhiko ash and Japanese guitar player Kozi of Malice Mizer band (*another big japanese band) i hope this can help.Thank you again for your time.Watchtower666 (talk)

• Comment In answer to your question, I don't know anything about http://www.darkasia.com/, but they host a page showing the newspaper coverage of Subkulture from a well established paper serving the Philipino community. The featured article gives expansive coverage to one of Subkulture's events. The other websites aren't the NY Times, but appear to be legitimate Indy Music websites with articles discussing Subkulture in particular. Someone interested in notable Goth bands probably won't go to the NYTimes, but they might go to Rakista.com. My point again is that there are lots of articles that are deletion worthy on Wikipedia and lots of Goth bands and record labels that aren't notable and have no references. This one has referenced sources and deals with a notable subject. I'd prefer to spend my time elsewhere fixing articles or deleting and cleaning up ones that deserve to be deleted. I humbly suggest this AfD be withdrawn. ChildofMidnight (talk) 06:26, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

:Comment: Among the references, only rakista.com seems legit. I dunno the legitimacy of soundclick, one is a multiply page, another is a file-sharing website, and the other is their own website. If someone finds mainstream citation (Philippine Daily Inquirer, The Philippine Star, Manila Bulletin, etc.), then this can be kept. And I'm referring to extensive coverage, not one-off features. –Howard the Duck 11:29, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

::Comment PinoyToday is an established newspaper for Philipino Americans in the Bay area (circulation of 40,000) and they did a substantial feature on Subkulture and their Halloween event. You admit Rakista is legitimate. There was also an image of coverage Subkulture recieved in Goth Magazine, but it wasn't referenced properly so Watchtower is working on tracking it down. The editor working cooperatively on this article also added coverage from Japan's Burst magazine. He's been very cooperative and is working hard to address any and all concerns. This article is now better referenced than the vast majority of articles on Wikipedia. Please end this AfD so we can all focus on improving articles and weeding out non-notable subjects. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:10, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

::Based on Howard the Duck's opinion that the one source passes wp:rs, and the bulk of the existing sources, I am giving the benefit of the doubt and withdrawing in good faith, although I still am not fully convinced. DENNIS BROWN (T) (C) 18:43, 8 November 2008 (UTC)

: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.