Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stary Olsa

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. As this is a Belarusian band it is unlikely that there are many English sources available. Consensus is in favor of keeping the article. (non-admin closure) Alpha Quadrant ^talk 22:24, 24 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Stary Olsa

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

I cannot find sufficient RS coverage to reflect notability under wp's rules. Epeefleche (talk) 00:03, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Y'know, them being a Belorussian band with 8 albums under their belt, I'm totally ready to say we should Ignore All Rules and keep here, regardless. Sufficient career achievement. Carrite (talk) 04:26, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Carrite. So, is your thinking that they aren't otherwise notable, if we apply the same rules to them that we apply to, say, Australian bands?--Epeefleche (talk) 05:34, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 13:05, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - To place Stary Olsa for deletion is utterly ridiculous. It is probably one of the most successful modern Belarusian bands, they tour in all surrounding countries.--Czalex 21:15, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep – the band successfully revives the musical traditions of Belarusian Middle Ages, is well-known in Belarus, frequently tours other countries, released many albums, etc. At this time this is the most successful band playing Belarusian Ethnic/Folk music. The request for deletion of this article makes no sense. Juras14 (talk) 23:40, 18 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Not sure what you mean by "RS coverage"? There is enough coverage of this famous band online. E.g. [of videos on YouTube], and >100000 links in Google for the original name "Стары Ольса" --Monk (talk) 06:31, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RS coverage refers to coverage by "reliable sources". Youtube videos, blogs, and the like don't qualify as RSs. We can't, as you suggest, deem the article notable because of the existence of Youtube videos.

Or, as the prior two editors suggest, because they "know" the band to be successful or well-known.--Epeefleche (talk) 16:28, 23 May 2011 (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.