Talk:List of youth orchestras in the United States

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical music, which aims to improve, expand, copy edit, and maintain all articles related to classical music, that are not covered by other classical music related projects. Please read the guidelines for writing and maintaining articles. To participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page for more details.Classical musicWikipedia:WikiProject Classical musicTemplate:WikiProject Classical musicClassical music

Lists Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Lists, an attempt to structure and organize all list pages on Wikipedia. If you wish to help, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.ListsWikipedia:WikiProject ListsTemplate:WikiProject ListsList
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

United States: Music Low‑importance

	United States portal 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
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Music portal This article is supported by WikiProject American music (assessed as Low-importance).

Untitled

On the page: http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/List_of_youth_orchestras_in_the_United_States There is no link on the MAP for the District of Columbia or Washington, DC. Can someone tell me how to add DC to the map? Ecepsava 10:57, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Replied User talk:Ecepsava. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 11:24, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There are a number of Ohio Youth Symphonies that are long standing that are not mentioned: Toledo, Mansfield, Newark-Granville. I am sure there are more.

Being an incomplete list

I find it odd this claims to be a list of youth orchestras in the US, but removes any that aren't on Wikipedia. When I tried to create a page to support this 'requirement' that page was removed and then my link was removed. What is the agenda in not having a more complete list? --DeknMike (talk) 13:32, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The 'agenda', as you so pointedly mischaracterize it, is to write an encyclopedia of notable subjects that is verifiable and based on reliable sources. You can peruse the relevant policies at WP:Source list and WP:NOT#DIR. Dlabtot (talk) 14:48, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't call it an agenda, I asked if there was one. I understand wikipolicies. I'm just wondering why you strip sources so frequently, and then purge the list. These are usually community-based organizations without effective public relations directors to help them make it to print.--DeknMike (talk) 23:38, 13 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's why we have a notability policy. Because if they aren't covered in reliable sources, they don't belong on Wikipedia. Of course, I have never 'stripped sources'. Dlabtot (talk) 16:37, 14 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The rigid content restrictions employed here and in related lists of orchestras are based on a misinterpretaton of notability policy and are inconsistent with Wikipedia practice and policy. It is perfectly acceptable for a list of this type to include redlinks. Notability does not require that another article already exists, only that there is independent coverage of the topic that could be used to create an article. The universe of youth orchestras is relatively limited and they typically are documented in 3rd-party sources, so it is reasonable to assume that any youth symphony orchestra is notable -- or should be covered in another article about a related entity. Listing redlinks helps build the encyclopedia by identifying articles that need to be created or expanded; refusing to list them stifles the development of Wikipedia. I have changed the lead section to indicate a less restrictive interpretation of the list scope. --Orlady (talk) 17:22, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The reverts to this article are looking remarkably like WP:Edit warring. Please identify the "policies" that say that the sourced prose content, blue links, and yes a few redlinks that I added to this article are disallowed. --Orlady (talk) 21:05, 15 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This list is terribly wrong. Some major (famous) youth orchestras are missing, and some of these don't even exist anymore.— Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ 50.133.157.235 (talk • contribs) 22:58, October 16, 2012 (UTC)

The trouble with youth orchestras is they tend to be voluntary organizations run by parents and educators who know how to assemble quality music but aren't good at public relations. The other problem is that Wikipedia relies on mainstream journalism, and the youth rely on Facebook & YouTube to talk about their organizations, and Wikipolicies frown on using them as sources. --DeknMike (talk) 04:16, 19 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I absolutely agree. This is a very abbreviated list of organizations and is a massive disservice to scholarly work on youth orchestras to have numerous verifiable organizations missing. There is no reason to require linked articles. "Notability guidelines do not apply to content within articles or lists" WP:NLISTITEM.

Editors prior to deletion should also consider that "Notability is based on the existence of suitable sources, not on the state of sourcing in an article." and that before "offering an opinion based on notability in a deletion discussion, editors are strongly encouraged to attempt to find sources for the subject in question and consider the possibility of existent sources if none can be found by a search." WP:NEXIST. In all the edits I have seen on this page, there has been no effort by notorious deleters to request citations or ensure they are legitimate entries. They simply delete without further requests.

As well, even at a lists most strict, the criteria recommended by Wikipedia is that "Every entry meets the notability criteria for its own non-redirect article in the English Wikipedia" [WP:CSC], not that it HAS its own page. Lists can also be exhaustive if they are "Short, complete lists of every item that is verifiably a member of the group. These should only be created if a complete list is reasonably short (less than 32K) and could be useful (e.g., for navigation) or interesting to readers." There are not 32,000 youth orchestras in the country. In fact, red-linking or requesting a citation may lead to a more notability instead of flatly deleting potentially legitimate entries.

This page has an enormous history of deletion for many legitimate organizations that would satisfy notability if editors spent more time verifying information and requesting citations rather than deleting important contributions. The guidelines are also applied inconsistently. Even properly linked organizations are being deleted. Jediwashington (talk) 02:57, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The selection criteria for list articles is subject to consensus, and for many years the apparent consensus on this article has been to only include entries with Wikipedia articles to show their notability. It's interesting that Jedi is attempting to add or restore entries that not only do not have articles, but are completely unsourced [1] [2] [3]. Meters (talk) 03:25, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus appears to be 3 editors who have chosen to delete hundreds of legitimate entries over the years for no reason other than page clutter with no followup from users. The fact that this page is full of complaints about how limited this list is should be of more concern to you as an editor. Demand citations, suggest people make pages, start a project to make the pages; but simply deleting entries from a list that should be exhaustive is lazy editing at best. Jediwashington (talk) 04:09, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The complaints on this talk page about this are almost a decade old. Entries with red links have been being removed for more than seven years, and by more than the three editors that you claim. If you wish to discuss "lazy editing" perhaps we should discuss all of the attempts to add redlinks without even a source to show the existence of the orchestra. let alone sufficient sources to show notability, such as your edits. Meters (talk) 04:21, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see anything stopping you from researching and creating articles for youth orchestras that are or were listed here but that lack articles. Since that is obviously something you feel strongly about, it is something you should consider doing. But when you introduce information to the encyclopedia, as you did here, it is your responsibility, not some other editor's, to provide sources that permit verification of the information. Please stop talking about "lazy editing" as if we should be doing this for you. General Ization ^Talk 04:34, 15 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]