| abstract
| - No indications that this TV and film score composer is notable. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:13, 6 June 2012 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:40, 6 June 2012 (UTC) Please see newest additions that demonstrate this composer's notability in the following ways: 1. The person has received a well-known and significant award or honor, or has been nominated for one several times. 2. The person has made a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field. - Benatural0000001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benatural0000001 (talk • contribs) 08:41, 8 June 2012 (UTC) — Benatural0000001 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
* Comment The BMI award is not one of the major awards listed at WP:MUSIC. Considering the cited reference list 37 winners for this award in 2003 (for broadcast TV only, not counting film and cable), this award may not be selective enough to confer true notability. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:50, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
* Comment Point taken, though the BMI awards are perhaps not so trivial as the amount of recipients per awards ceremony ratio may suggest. The criteria for receiving this award demonstrates this clearly: BMI honored the composers of music featured in the past year’s top-grossing films, top-rated prime-time network television series, and highest ranking cable network programs tonight at its annual Film & Television Awards. Note that the article states that only the top rated prime-time network television series are honored. BMI has 500,000 musician members worldwide, with a membership that includes some of the most prolific musicians and publishers in music, film and television. Taking that statistic into consideration, 37 member award recipients out of a 500,000 member body is a very small percentage, and therefore these awards can arguably be viewed as notable. Additionally, this number represents a pool of recipients across many disciplines and categories, so the "large" number is to be expected. Anectodotally, consider the Grammy Awards. There are many more than 37 award recipients per award ceremony, but does this make the honor any less significant? Lastly, consider the second point above in my first comment. Surely this composer has made "a widely recognized contribution that is part of the enduring historical record in his or her specific field" considering the depth of his filmography and discography. Benatural0000001 —Preceding undated comment added 17:20, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
* Comment actually, that argument makes the award even less significant. If the award is given simply based on the popularity of the show, it has nothing to do with the accomplishments of the artist at all. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 04:38, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
* Comment How is that exactly? Perhaps you may not understand the role of music in film and television industry sufficiently. The popularity of a show is result of the sum of its parts, any one working in any discipline of the entertainment industry will tell you that. Steven Spielberg himself said that Sound and music make up more than half of communicating a story, greater even than what you’re seeing. Francis Ford Coppola also makes this assertion: "...sound was your special friend because sound does at least 50% of the job sharing with picture, but sound was infinitely cheaper than picture. So we decided in the early days... that we would put a big effort in the sound capabilities of the films. Sound, by nature, includes both sound effects and music. Simply put, if these shows had poorly executed music, they would not be as popular. Similarly, if these shows had poorly executed acting or scripts, they would not be as popular. Now this does not mean that films and television shows that have quality music, acting and writing will always be popular. And yes, popularity does not necessarily imply quality. Regardless of these subjective measurements, achieving popularity and success in the film and entertainment industry is a valid measurement of achievement.Benatural0000001 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.5.255.134 (talk) 17:44, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
* Comment The popularity of any media project is the result of the combination of a lot of factors, to be sure. But in the end, the technicians and artists responsible for all of those factors are not all notable. A television program in which the boom mike is constantly visible would be ridiculous, but we don't call the guy who holds the boom mike out of the camera shot notable because he has achieved that feat. Notability (for Wikipedia's definition) has clear definitions, and Russo has not met them. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
* Comment - Here is additional material supporting notability Wikipedia:MUSIC#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles: 1. Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself. 5. Has released two or more albums on a major label or on one of the more important indie labels. 10. Has performed music for a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, inclusion on a notable compilation album, etc.
*
* Comment Of all of those items, the only one that comes close to being a real sign of notability is the Examiner interview, but one must consider the nature of Examiner.com itself (essentially an outlet for independent bloggers) to evaluate whether this constitutes significant coverage. Let's look at the rest of the claims one by one. 1.
* The Amazon book link isn't even real: the authors listed for the book are incorrect, as can be seen at the book's Google Books entry. 2.
* The Variety "article" is really just a listing of the composers for every prime-time television show for the summer of 2011. 3.
* The Sun-60 discography is real: if this is the only claim to notability, then the article can be redirected. 4.
* The David Russo "discography" is just a list of Russo's credits: he didn't release these albums, he is just credited on the production of them. 5.
* The WP:BAND criteria in regard to "performed a work of media that is notable, e.g. a theme for a network television show,..." refers to composers or performers responsible for the generally recognizable theme for a show (say, the theme from M*A*S*H), not the generally unrecognizable background music. The TV credits for Russo seem to be exclusively for "additional music" or for single episode music. His film music credits are as a "programmer" -- not generally the artist one credits with creating the music. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 12:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
* Comment Yes I see your point. Though the final point with regards to "composers or performers responsible for the generally recognizable theme for a show (say, the theme from M*A*S*H), not the generally unrecognizable background music." might be inaccurate. He has composed all of the music, including the main theme, for the TV show Nikita (TV series).
* CommentHere is a review that comments on the his work: Does this qualify as published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentarie? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Benatural0000001 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
* Comment That review doesn't really count as significant coverage: it's a review of the DVD release and the note about Russo constitutes about 1/2 of the last sentence, which is buried in a paragraph about the sound quality of the disk. And it's not a terribly favorable 1/2 sentence at that, but Wikipedia guidelines don't require favorable coverage. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:59, 12 June 2012 (UTC) Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:57, 13 June 2012 (UTC)
* Redirect to Sun-60. I do not see that the notability criteria are satisfied by any of the material above. My own seraches did not turn up anything either. As a member of Sun-p60, a rediect to that article is appropriate. -- Whpq (talk) 17:26, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
|
![[RDF Data]](/fct/images/sw-rdf-blue.png)