Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Warm Dust

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. The relevance of the sources proposed by Karl Twist has not been substantially addressed or refuted. Sandstein 06:52, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Warm Dust

[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)

The sources listed here provide little more than WP:ROUTINE coverage of the band. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Allan Nonymous (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bands and musicians and England. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:39, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, the group has released records on three notable record labels, BASF, Trend, Uni. Plus they have two notable members, Alan King and Paul Carrack.
Karl Twist (talk) 07:49, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Notability is not WP:INHERITED, saying a band is notable because it was involved in notable things is almost the definition of this, although these may be a good place to look for sources. Allan Nonymous (talk) 11:38, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Most times when there are two or more notable people in a band that's a consideration of notability. Another consideration is that the band or artist has had two record albums released on two notable record labels. So using the Inherited thing is not really right. And this band would be triply notable if I could get hold of the continental rock magazines and books because that's where they were more popular. If you have a look in the Wikipedia talk:Articles for deletion/Warm Dust section, you can see that I have dropped in a link. They made a splash when they were seen by Pope Paul VI. (I think that was the correct Pope)
Karl Twist (talk) 12:34, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Allan Nonymous Karl is making valid arguments under WP:BAND#c5 and c6. That isn't an absolute case against deletion, but it isn't fallacious. Mach61 13:22, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I might look again later but there's this (page 13) in Disc and Music Echo. A lot of what I'm finding merely mentions the band once. toweli (talk) 14:20, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to Toweli, Hi thanks for the Disc and Music Echo "Warm Dust `back' Lennon" article link. That got me searching and I've found a few more articles now. I found the Record Mirror, October 9, 1971 article "Warm Dust slam the British mass media" on page 23, Melody Maker, July 25, 1970, News in Brief, Warm Dust section, Page 35, Melody Maker, May 1, 1971 "No Dust on peace show" article on Page 4, and the Melody Maker, January 30, 1971 article, War, Peace and Warm Dust article by Andrew Means on Page 11. So we have five articles on the group plus there's other stuff in newspaper archives that I can't access. One has to subscribe to them.
Cheers Karl Twist (talk) 12:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete; in response to my above comment defending Karl, I note again that WP:NMUSIC is not absolute (conversely, meeting any of these criteria does not mean that an article must be kept). Aside from the stunt with Pope John, this band seems to be a footnote in the Paul Carrack story; I can't find anything usable for WP:GNG purposes, nor even WP:RS that go into enough depth for me to think this article should stick around. An article should never have to rely on unreliable blogs or be composed of facts from a bunch of miscellanious stray mentions in RS, which is all this band has. Mach61 19:43, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note to closing admin, Even though I believe there's enough on Warm Dust to warrant a keep, could I ask please that if a consensus eventually leans towards a deletion, you might consider the option of redirecting rather than deleting? This way we can preserve the history and links. There are a number of possibilities. There is Paul Carrack in his Career section, Ace, and there's Alan King etc. Thanks. Karl Twist (talk) 07:01, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Karl Twist we can't really do that, see WP:XY Mach61 12:13, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we can. It's done all the time and there is already a section for the Warm Dust group on Carrack's page. I didn't make it. Karl Twist (talk) 12:28, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep or redirect--He's always been dismissive of them, but brief mentions of the band have appeared in RS on Carrack for five decades. A 1982 Rolling Stone profile mentions that their "major [sic] to fame was a psychedelic antiwar LP". The only early 1970s things I found were short articles or reviews in Kensington and Chelsea News, Daily Post (Liverpool), and The Oregon Journal. Caro7200 (talk) 11:45, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep because of the sources linked by Karl Twist. toweli (talk) 15:43, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep in view of the sources identified in this discussion by Karl Twist and Caro 7200 including reliable newspapers and magazines that together enable a pass of WP:GNG so that deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:27, 29 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There's sufficient coverage now referenced to evidence the notability of the subject and to sustain an article. Good work by @Karl Twist. ResonantDis_tortion 12:09, 30 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply, @ResonantDistortion:, thanks. It was a bit of a job. It was @Toweli: with the Disc and Music Echo "Warm Dust `back' Lennon" article link. That got me keen to find more. I realize that I needed to search deeper. And then I found stuff that I had missed. Cheers
  Karl Twist (talk) 08:04, 31 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 13:09, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Term is apparently used in astronomy, that's all Gbooks brings up. I don't find any sources otherwise, and what's been presented is brief mentions. Oaktree b (talk) 14:29, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment, Just a post to show where I'm up to so far as per the table below.

OK, the first seven in the table are articles about Warm Dust. There's another one in the British Newspaper archive but I can't read the title. All reliable sources. I may have a look around later to see if I can fine more.
Cheers Karl Twist (talk) 09:48, 3 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not seeing anything particular strong, but maybe an WP:ATD is possible. For your above suggestion, which talk about Paul Carrack specifically? IgelRM (talk) 02:49, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reply, Hi IgelRM. Well, Paul Carrack is the man people think of most when they talk about Warm Dust. Carrack was also a member of the Milwaukee Coasters who according to John Surguy was the band that Warm Dust evolved out of. See: John Surguy - Warm Dust Interview — The Self Portrait Gospel. And I imagine this is the same UK group that recorded for the Pama Records label. As Carrack was a major player in the band it would make sense that a re-direct would go to him if the Warm Dust page was somehow deleted.
That being said, I can't see how it should be deleted when with the seven articles I provided in the table above prove that it has passed the below,

Wikipedia:BAND#C1 with it being the "subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable" etc. etc.
Wikipedia:BAND#C5 as they have had releases on BASF, Metronome, Stateside, Trend and Uni labels. So that should satisfy the requirement of having "released two or more albums on a major record label or on one of the more important indie labels" etc. etc.
Wikipedia:BAND#C6 as Paul Carrack, Alan King are notable. And quite likely Keith Bailey would be too. So that satisfies the requirement of Warm Dust being "an ensemble that contains two or more independently notable musicians".
Wikipedia:BAND#C10 as they have been on the Beat-Club show where they performed the Richie Havens classic "Indian Rope Man" and "Warm Dust Worm Dance" Parts 1 & 2. They have been on multiple other German and possibly other Euro country television broadcasts. That could satisfy " performance in a television show or notable film". It is possible that they may even qualify for Wikipedia:BAND#C12 but I can't access info on German or Dutch TV shows.

Now, it's been said elsewhere on this page that the article relied on "unreliable blogs or be composed of facts from a bunch of miscellanious stray mentions". Well, I've gotten rid of all of those so-called "unreliable", possibly bar one or two which are in unison with a reliable source. And none of the seven articles about Warm Dust in the above table I provided are stray mentions. They are articles about the band. And the other three are reviews on their work. Definitely not stray mentions! And page 16 of the 28 November, 1970 Fleetwood Mac article preserved on the website about the lovely Joni Mitchell is not stray mention either. While it appears to be no more than 100 words, the title is misleading. It is more about Warm Dust than it is Fleetwood Mac! And the The Encyclopedia of Popular Music Warm Dust entry which I haven't added to the page is something that I would call useful at the very least.

As you can see, this is what the page looked like, or you can see it alternatively here (Example 1) when the AFD tag was applied.
When I cleaned it up a fair bit and added better refs, it now looks like this, or you can see it alternatively here (Example 2)

Well, I can say that there's more than sufficient proof now that the article qualifies as a keep.

Cheers Karl Twist (talk) 08:58, 4 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed with Karl these citations are more than brief mentions. Furthermore I've just added an album review in an independent German periodical here. Evidence that further coverage is highly likely in non-English sources. ResonantDis_tortion 18:54, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Plenty of music press and some general press coverage about the band from 1970-1972; I've just added another ref about meeting the Pope from The Times. Adam Sampson (talk) 09:55, 4 September 2024 (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.