Biography: Musicians Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians.

United States Unassessed

This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States ??? This article has not yet received a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... This article passes GNG because their music has been reviewed four times by reliable publications in the Christian music industry.--The Cross Bearer (talk)

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because... This article passes BAND because their music has been reviewed four times by reliable publications in the Christian music industry, per the No. 1 criteria.--The Cross Bearer (talk)

• I could even create an album article, for the Black & White release, so it makes this even or notable.The Cross Bearer (talk) 08:56, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
• @KH-1:, I've declined the speedy since the reviews are just enough to assert some notability. That said, I am concerned that there's no verifiable editorial oversight at Indie Vision Music's website. I can see where it's certainly a popular website but this doesn't always mean that a site would be considered a RS per Wikipedia's guidelines. Cross Rhythms has the same issue, although Down the Line does have an editorial board so that looks to be OK. I'd like to see some stronger sources here since it's still possible that KH-1 could take this to AfD. The Cross Bearer, I'd wait on an article for the album since that looks to be their main source of notability/sourcing for the time being and as such, runs the risk of someone suggesting that the album article be merged into the main article. That and also there's still concerns over the sources. If this does go to AfD it'll be under a lot of scrutiny and the sourcing needs to be pretty strong. Offhand a quick look brings up this article from the Sun Gazette, which is a decent start. It's an interview, which tends to be depreciated by many editors, but it's still a start. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡) 09:55, 24 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  • @3family6, Walter Görlitz, KH-1, Tokyogirl79, Metalworker14, Ilovechristianmusic, and Wgolf:, I just want to let you know, sourcing is no problem, with regards to this article, in question. If you take a look at CCM sources, then you would recognize Cross Rhythms is the biggest Christian music publication in the United Kingdom. Indie Vision Music is a reliable source because they have as their managing editor, Josh Murphy or JoshIVM, as he used to be credited. Down the Line Zine is a reliable source, due to it being a published magazine, and it has two editors, to boot.The Cross Bearer (talk) 00:11, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Tokyogirl79:: IVM does have editorial oversight, and so does Cross Rhythms. As The Cross Bearer mentioned, Cross Rhythms in particular is the largest Christian radio outlet in the UK. It was even a print magazine at one point. It absolutely has a reliable editorial board. I did volunteer work for them a few years ago, and can personally vouch that Cross Rhythms checks its content for accuracy.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 00:53, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

• @The Cross Bearer, 3family6, Walter Görlitz, KH-1, Tokyogirl79, Metalworker14, and Wgolf: I see that there is no issue with the page, and I do agree that there are strong enough resources for the page to not be speedily deleted. However, I do think that an article being created for their album, Black and White, would help make the page stronger in the terms of notability. Ilovechristianmusic (talk) 01:01, 25 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I do not consider there is "Significant coverage" of this band, two reviews is hardly that! And using Facebook as a reference is really scraping the barrel! Theroadislong (talk) 08:00, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Try four reviews. I'd call it notability.The Cross Bearer (talk) 08:11, 28 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]