Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Live Armageddon

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 no consensus. MBisanz talk 01:20, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Live Armageddon[edit]

Live Armageddon (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable album. Fails WP:Music Azviz (talk) 03:42, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- — LinguistAtLarge • Talk  04:08, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Passes WP:MUSIC by being an album by a notable band on a notable label. Needs better sourcing, but AfD is not clean-up. Blackmetalbaz (talk) 11:55, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment - I do not see the criteria you list on WP:NALBUMS. Being released by a notable label by a notable band doesn't automatically make the album notable (notability not inherited, etc.). It needs to have coverage in of itself. Grandmartin11 (talk) 21:44, 3 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Fails WP:Music. Does not meet the basic notability criteria which is: "All articles on albums, singles or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines, with significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." I can not even locate this album on Allmusic.com - and they list every album; notable or not. Untick (talk) 02:32, 4 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Just as an FYI, User:Untick and the nominator, User:Azviz, are among a group of accounts on Wikipedia currently being discussed on Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Prodding spree as potentially being sockpuppets or otherwise fishy accounts. Both were created somewhat recently and from the very start seem to solely devote themselves to AFD-style matters instead of regular contributions to the encyclopedia, and they also share some other strange behavior in question. See the AN/I thread for more info. DreamGuy (talk) 20:16, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Pastor Theo (talk) 01:04, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete, fails notability per WP:MUSIC#Albums. No significant coverage in reliable, third-party, sources.  Esradekan Gibb  "Talk" 01:43, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep Maybe I'm hallucinating, but I'm seeing two reliable references in the article already. Unless we've put the bar higher without informing the community, it meets the multiple reliable sources requirement -- just barely. - Mgm|(talk) 22:23, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete - Unable to find significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Fails WP:MUSIC. Untick (talk) 00:16, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Please don't !vote twice in the AFD. All the arguments before the relisting remain the same and are just as valid. MuZemike 01:44, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete fails MUSIC.Bali ultimate (talk) 18:02, 9 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep – I see at least three reliable sources there if you count AllMusic. That's enough significant coverage to establish sufficient notability. MuZemike 01:46, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: I think the problem people are having finding sources is that this band is from Brazil, and when you search Google it ranks results in your language of preference much higher than others. By going in and doing an advanced search set to only Brazil, and specifying the album name in quotes and the band name, I find a sizeable number of results that look like they'd meet our notability requirements... sources in other areas/languages are just added icing on top of that. Per our policies we try to avoid institutional/regional bias, and I think this article is in danger of falling because of that. On top of that, as others point out, there appear to be enough English language ones to demonstrate notability all by themselves. DreamGuy (talk) 20:16, 11 April 2009 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Live_Armageddon&oldid=1142222107"