Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Choir of Trinity College, Kandy

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 no consensus defaulting to Keep and w/o prejudice to a future renomination. Ad Orientem (talk) 03:09, 10 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Choir of Trinity College, Kandy

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Local choir, lacks independent RS to establish notability ^{Atsme📞📧} 12:56, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: - I'm of the mind that this should be a merge/delete to Trinity College, Kandy, which is a primary/secondary private school for boys and it doesn't even mention the choir. I believe it would be appropriate to merge/delete rather than keep this article as a standalone cited mostly to itself, FaceBook, the Daily News, Daily Mirror, and a few others that cover the school more so than the choir. ^{Atsme📞📧} 15:07, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - current wording seems very promotional. Deb (talk) 13:20, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep inappropriate nomination to delete. The choir is 146 years old and still running. It meets WP:NMUSIC #1 (both for coverage included and presumably pre-internet coverage exists) and #12. It has also release various albums. If you still insist the page should not exist there is an obvious merge target at Trinity College, Kandy and a merge does not require a deletion discussion. Legacypac (talk) 14:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is appropriate - see my note above. Also see Deb's comment - a COI tag has been placed on the TP of the article's author and on the TP of the article. ^{Atsme📞📧} 15:07, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 14:47, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sri Lanka-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 14:47, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When did we start deleting pages because the creator has a COI? When did we throw attribution out the window and start merge/deleting? Normally we merge/redirect. This is a 146 year old school choir. It's not some new business or band no one's heard of looking for free promo. Legacypac (talk) 15:22, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

We don't delete pages because the creator has a COI. We do, however, delete pages when the wording is so promotional that it's obvious the creator has a COI. Deb (talk) 15:43, 17 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The wording is not that promotional. This is not a G11. What is more obvious is the creator's name suggests a connection. It remains a bad nomination when the choir meets WP:NMUSIC and there is a perfectly acceptable merge target. Legacypac (talk)

G11 is a criterion for speedy deletion. This is not a speedy deletion nomination. If the wording is very promotional, we have the option to delete it and allow someone impartial to recreate it with suitable wording. Deb (talk) 07:00, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Let’s not overlook the fact that the topic fails notability as a stand alone per no independent RS to establish notability - see Mormon Tabernacle Choir and the RS used to establish its notability. Trinity College, Kandy doesn’t even mention the choir, and there is plenty of room to add it. Mention of the choir belongs in that article, not as a stand alone. If the choir is commissioned to go on an international tour, or makes a recording that hits the charts, there’s a better chance that it will be covered in multiple RS. ^{Atsme📞📧} 14:24, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:46, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to article on the college.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:44, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: I'm not a fan of multiple relists but lets see if we can close in on consensus for how to deal with this.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ad Orientem (talk) 02:27, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note I have cleaned up the article, as best I can, removing the self-promotional tone and unsubstantiated material. Hopefully that should make it easier for editors to determine whether this article should be retained or merged. Dan arndt (talk) 01:12, 6 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - the issue is that it fails WP:GNG and lacks RS to establish WP:N ^{Atsme📞📧} 07:33, 6 July 2018 (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.