Talk:Far Western District

Proposed deletion

Basing deletion on WP:ORG seems rather draconian. Granted that the article needs work though. I've added one secondary source to establish notability. Many of the US news source archives found on google news are pay-per-article, so excluded.LeadSongDog (talk) 09:08, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

What you said about pay-to-view sources is true enough, but the ref cited is actually for Westminster Chorus, which already has an article along with Masters of Harmony. The mention of Far West in it is trivial; also, I would say that very few regional organisations, if any, have their own articles. I will leave you to work on it if you feel it can still grow and conform to WP:ORG, otherwise, I would suggest that you placed the content in the related groups' articles and restore the redirect. Ohconfucius (talk) 09:53, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I've added a bunch. I realize there may still be some discomfort with some of the refs. In order to avoid pay-per-view archives, I've used materials that were archived on sites which at first blush might appear as primary, but in fact are merely archives of secondary sources. I couldn't find clear guidelines on this distinction, but it's at worst a technicality as the accuracy of the archive can still be verified at cost. The problem of course is that publishers have a vested interest in the pay-per-view model. If we disallow the use of such freely accessible archives much content will become ephemera.LeadSongDog (talk) 20:56, 17 December 2007 (UTC)