772:" Other stipulations: appeared on music chart, certified gold or higher, nominated for a major music award, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award, recording was performed in a medium that is notable, e.g., a theme for a network television show, performance in a television show or notable film, The recording has been a featured subject of a substantial broadcast segment across a national radio or TV network.
697:. The latter is sadly behind a paywall, but based on the visible content and the excerpt shown in Google search results, it seems likely to be relevant (note that the article's date is also a week or so after the EP's release date). Not sure if these would be considered sufficiently significant or reliable to sustain notability (maybe it depends on what's in that Times article).
976:
band over several WP articles (e.g. there is a
Template Box at the bottom of a series of Kish Mauve articles) is the wrong approach. Have one central article on the band and anything that is struggling with GNG (e.g. songs or albums) should be added/merged to that article to consolidate references.
368:
This is not just about the issue of hopeless article and lack reliable sources, the most important argument is not notable album and does not meet the requirements of
Knowledge. You came here for me. You instead of understanding the arguments in intro, you prefer trolling. Please stop trolling and
349:
I have "focused on facts", there is nothing personal here. You have recently edited several articles related to Kish Mauve including the aforementioned song (which features on this EP) so I don't see how you can say it is not related. I am not familiar with this band or their music so I offer no
840:
in which
Subtropical-man accused me of trolling and then deleted it. He has also accused PC78 of trolling, which is still visible above. Neither of us actually voted to keep the article yet, and mere comments have been subjected to baseless accusations of foul play. The nominator is engaged in
520:- In the argument above, PC78 made valid calls for proper deletion arguments, which the nominator countered with accusations rather than reasoned responses. The following are NOT reasons to delete: being a stub, having been created by a non-active user, having too few references (see
291:); notability of the band is not the question here, though I feel there are enough sources available to show that they are; "no studio album" (?) doesn't mean anything, and the fact that the article is a stub and was created by a now inactive user are not grounds for deletion.
309:
You are wrong, there is no relationship with our dispute in another discussion. Please focus on facts and not personal trips. This is not notable EP album (no studio album) with 3 songs by band on borderline notability, album totally fails of
318:. And now, this article is rubbish - stub, lack of reliable sources etc. It does not matter that you can fix it - in this form is to delete and.... it does not make sense to repair it because does not meet the requirements of Knowledge.
528:, which do not support deleting the article for any of the reasons given. The article surely needs some cleanup and expansion, but this deletion nomination should be withdrawn as unsupportable and possibly uncivil. ---
215:
246:
Not notable EP album (no studio album) with 3 songs by band on borderline notability. Article is stub, lack reliable sources for album (one archived source of "sundaybest.net/site/releases" is not enough). Create by
350:
further comment with regard to notability, but we do not delete articles simply because they are short and lack sources - if we did we would have to delete half of
Knowledge. That is not what notability means.
619:. Also note that I have not yet voted, but I do see the need for better arguments before I vote. That's not "making a fuss" unless I am the latest member of the conspiracy that you see all around you. ---
430:
First: you are watching my editions - I have evidence, you came here for me, you are not here accidentally, these are fact and you know it. Second: article does not meet the requirements of
Knowledge.
477:
615:. As far as I can determine, you have said the album is not notable because notability is something Knowledge cares about. That is not an explanation of why it's not notable. See
720:
209:
168:
977:
In a decade's time, these articles are going to get deleted as their thin/weak sources drop away and interest wanes, so consolidation will help preservation of the band.
434:
is wide consensus of
Knowledge, you must accept rules and standards of the Knowledge or go away from Knowledge. Your posts mean only this: "I have somewhere the
497:
412:. The problem is not that I don't understand your argument for deletion, it's that you don't really make one. Simply saying it isn't notable is not enough.
115:
100:
952:. Nothing can be merged, as has been with obvious kindness suggested, either, because unsourced material is not moved elsewhere but deleted outright. -
576:(see above)! The article can be improved (add reliable sources, add more text and other) but article does not meet the requirements of the Knowledge.
920:, redirect to the band's article, preserving the history so that anyone can merge anything useful to the band page without further AfD involvement.
916:. Maybe it's notable, but the more important point is that it is unlikely to ever be sourced well enough to expand beyond permastub status. So, per
787:
Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article
741:
Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article
373:
is wide consensus of
Knowledge, if you can not accept it - go away from Knowledge. Your trolling and spamming will not be accepted here.
864:
634:
543:
141:
136:
145:
230:
175:
900:
128:
197:
524:), being an EP (which by the way IS a studio album, just a short one). The nominator seems unfamiliar with the finer points of
95:
88:
17:
733:. Conversely, an album does not need to be by a notable artist or ensemble to merit a standalone article if it meets the
287:
Contested prod as I feel the nom does not make an adequate case (also this appears to be related to a content dispute at
969:. No single material RS on this album; any RS I could find was about the band and their songs and not this album per se
749:
714:
770:(red. no page of band, records, label, producer etc), and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it.
109:
105:
191:
878:
1005:
817:
694:
662:
591:
449:
384:
329:
270:
40:
187:
982:
986:
961:
929:
902:
869:
860:
828:
706:
702:
673:
639:
630:
602:
548:
539:
509:
505:
489:
485:
460:
421:
395:
359:
340:
300:
281:
70:
689:
I did a fair bit of searching and was able to find a couple sources not currently included in the article.
237:
744:
1001:
36:
690:
898:
807:
779:
735:
725:
652:
581:
439:
435:
431:
374:
370:
319:
311:
288:
260:
252:
132:
978:
957:
580:, before you start writing tips, I advise you to read the guidelines because you're making a fuss.
223:
248:
925:
851:
846:
698:
646:
621:
559:
530:
501:
481:
203:
942:
777:
So, this album does not meet the requirements of
Knowledge. In addition, a simple sentence of
566:
being a stub, having been created by a non-active user, having too few references, being an EP
84:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
1000:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
938:
917:
525:
521:
315:
256:
65:
970:
893:
842:
611:
If you have "written about" notability "two times", it is only via the repeated statement
405:
124:
76:
729:. That an album is an officially released recording by a notable musician or ensemble is
953:
417:
355:
296:
941:
and there is little to discuss beyond that, aside from arguments that are variants of
973:
921:
616:
409:
791:. Separate article of this album does not meet the requirements of Knowledge, the
162:
949:
946:
56:
913:
51:
752:
show 7 points - requirements of the
Knowledge for music articles, in brief: "
413:
351:
292:
438:
and I always oppose for you". Knowledge is wrong place for you, sorry.
994:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
404:"Trolling and spamming"? I have done no such thing - please be
766:, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not
881:
to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
719:
An album requires its own notability, and that notability is
568:" are just additives in my description. The main argument is
55:. The basic information of note can be preserved there.
838:
259:. Part of data I integrated with main article of band.
158:
154:
150:
222:
478:
list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions
892:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
889:Can other editors please give an opinion on this?
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
1008:). No further edits should be made to this page.
496:Note: This discussion has been included in the
476:Note: This discussion has been included in the
731:not by itself reason for a standalone article
236:
8:
116:Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
498:list of Music-related deletion discussions
495:
475:
972:. Spreading the actions of a borderline
613:Notability is wide consensus of Knowledge
251:, no active user. Album totally fails of
799:to merge with main article (and create
758:(red. not just a mention somewhere) of
750:Knowledge:Notability (music)#Recordings
7:
564:I would like to remind you that: "
24:
101:Introduction to deletion process
578:Not every album is encyclopedic
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
945:. There are simply no sources
1:
987:13:31, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
962:11:31, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
930:03:47, 13 February 2019 (UTC)
726:requires independent evidence
71:16:16, 14 February 2019 (UTC)
903:11:34, 6 February 2019 (UTC)
870:13:10, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
829:01:04, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
736:general notability guideline
707:00:22, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
674:01:04, 30 January 2019 (UTC)
640:21:46, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
603:20:47, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
549:20:23, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
510:15:52, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
490:15:52, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
461:15:37, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
422:15:33, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
396:15:25, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
360:15:08, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
341:14:26, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
301:14:15, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
282:13:02, 29 January 2019 (UTC)
91:(AfD)? Read these primers!
1025:
997:Please do not modify it.
691:a brief review of the EP
32:Please do not modify it.
695:an article in The Times
693:from dmcworld.net and
845:behavior and is also
762:(red. many sources),
572:and I wrote about it
89:Articles for deletion
937:since subject fails
780:Knowledge:Notability
436:Knowledge:Notability
432:Knowledge:Notability
371:Knowledge:Notability
312:Knowledge:Notability
289:2 Hearts (2007 song)
253:Knowledge:Notability
887:Relisting comment:
905:
855:
837:- See this edit:
825:
670:
625:
599:
534:
512:
492:
457:
410:assume good faith
392:
337:
278:
106:Guide to deletion
96:How to contribute
1016:
999:
891:
884:
882:
868:
853:
849:the process. ---
827:
823:
813:
810:
745:space permitting
672:
668:
658:
655:
650:
638:
623:
601:
597:
587:
584:
563:
547:
532:
459:
455:
445:
442:
394:
390:
380:
377:
339:
335:
325:
322:
280:
276:
266:
263:
241:
240:
226:
178:
176:Mauve (EP) Stats
166:
148:
86:
63:
34:
1024:
1023:
1019:
1018:
1017:
1015:
1014:
1013:
1012:
1006:deletion review
995:
967:Delete/ReDirect
906:
877:
875:
850:
820:
815:
811:
808:
775:
774:
665:
660:
656:
653:
644:
620:
594:
589:
585:
582:
557:
529:
452:
447:
443:
440:
387:
382:
378:
375:
369:spamming here.
332:
327:
323:
320:
273:
268:
264:
261:
183:
174:
139:
125:Kish Mauve (EP)
123:
120:
83:
80:
77:Kish Mauve (EP)
57:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
1022:
1020:
1011:
1010:
990:
989:
979:Britishfinance
964:
932:
890:
885:
874:
873:
872:
818:
768:self-published
712:
711:
710:
709:
683:
682:
681:
680:
679:
678:
677:
676:
663:
606:
605:
592:
552:
551:
514:
513:
493:
473:
472:
471:
470:
469:
468:
467:
466:
465:
464:
463:
450:
425:
424:
399:
398:
385:
363:
362:
344:
343:
330:
304:
303:
271:
244:
243:
180:
119:
118:
113:
103:
98:
81:
79:
74:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1021:
1009:
1007:
1003:
998:
992:
991:
988:
984:
980:
975:
971:
968:
965:
963:
959:
955:
951:
948:
944:
940:
936:
933:
931:
927:
923:
919:
915:
911:
908:
907:
904:
901:
899:
897:
896:
888:
883:
880:
871:
866:
862:
858:
857:
848:
844:
839:
836:
833:
832:
831:
830:
821:
814:
806:
802:
798:
795:only one: to
794:
790:
788:
782:
781:
773:
771:
769:
765:
761:
757:
754:Has been the
751:
748:
746:
742:
738:
737:
732:
728:
727:
722:
721:not inherited
716:
708:
704:
700:
699:Dindon~enwiki
696:
692:
688:
685:
684:
675:
666:
659:
651:- see below.
648:
647:Doomsdayer520
643:
642:
641:
636:
632:
628:
627:
618:
614:
610:
609:
608:
607:
604:
595:
588:
579:
575:
571:
567:
561:
560:Doomsdayer520
556:
555:
554:
553:
550:
545:
541:
537:
536:
527:
523:
519:
516:
515:
511:
507:
503:
502:Ceethekreator
499:
494:
491:
487:
483:
482:Ceethekreator
479:
474:
462:
453:
446:
437:
433:
429:
428:
427:
426:
423:
419:
415:
411:
407:
403:
402:
401:
400:
397:
388:
381:
372:
367:
366:
365:
364:
361:
357:
353:
348:
347:
346:
345:
342:
333:
326:
317:
313:
308:
307:
306:
305:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
285:
284:
283:
274:
267:
258:
254:
250:
239:
235:
232:
229:
225:
221:
217:
214:
211:
208:
205:
202:
199:
196:
193:
189:
186:
185:Find sources:
181:
177:
173:
170:
164:
160:
156:
152:
147:
143:
138:
134:
130:
126:
122:
121:
117:
114:
111:
107:
104:
102:
99:
97:
94:
93:
92:
90:
85:
78:
75:
73:
72:
69:
68:
64:
62:
61:
54:
53:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
996:
993:
966:
934:
909:
894:
886:
876:
852:
834:
804:
800:
796:
792:
786:
784:
783:works here:
778:
776:
767:
763:
759:
755:
753:
740:
734:
730:
724:
718:
713:
686:
622:
612:
577:
573:
569:
565:
531:
517:
249:User:Cazxiro
245:
233:
227:
219:
212:
206:
200:
194:
184:
171:
82:
66:
59:
58:
50:redirect to
49:
47:
31:
28:
847:bludgeoning
809:Subtropical
793:question is
764:non-trivial
654:Subtropical
583:Subtropical
441:Subtropical
376:Subtropical
321:Subtropical
262:Subtropical
210:free images
950:notability
943:WP:ILIKEIT
914:Kish Mauve
895:Ritchie333
854:DOOMSDAYER
715:WP:NALBUMS
624:DOOMSDAYER
570:notability
533:DOOMSDAYER
52:Kish Mauve
1002:talk page
954:The Gnome
947:verifying
939:WP:NALBUM
918:WP:NOPAGE
797:delete or
574:two times
526:WP:NMUSIC
522:WP:NEXIST
316:WP:NMUSIC
257:WP:NMUSIC
37:talk page
1004:or in a
922:Bakazaka
910:Redirect
879:Relisted
865:Contribs
801:redirect
760:multiple
635:Contribs
544:Contribs
169:View log
110:glossary
39:or in a
843:uncivil
835:Comment
756:subject
687:Comment
518:Comment
216:WP refs
204:scholar
142:protect
137:history
87:New to
974:WP:GNG
935:Delete
717:say: "
617:WP:JNN
188:Google
146:delete
60:bd2412
406:civil
231:JSTOR
192:books
163:views
155:watch
151:links
16:<
983:talk
958:talk
926:talk
861:Talk
824:en-2
812:-man
723:and
703:talk
669:en-2
657:-man
631:Talk
598:en-2
586:-man
540:Talk
506:talk
486:talk
456:en-2
444:-man
418:talk
414:PC78
408:and
391:en-2
379:-man
356:talk
352:PC78
336:en-2
324:-man
314:and
297:talk
293:PC78
277:en-2
265:-man
255:and
224:FENS
198:news
159:logs
133:talk
129:edit
912:to
856:520
626:520
535:520
238:TWL
167:– (
985:)
960:)
928:)
822:|
743:,
739:.
705:)
667:|
596:|
508:)
500:.
488:)
480:.
454:|
420:)
389:|
358:)
334:|
299:)
275:|
218:)
161:|
157:|
153:|
149:|
144:|
140:|
135:|
131:|
981:(
956:(
924:(
867:)
863:|
859:(
826:)
819:✉
816:(
805:?
803:)
789:"
785:"
747:.
701:(
671:)
664:✉
661:(
649::
645:@
637:)
633:|
629:(
600:)
593:✉
590:(
562::
558:@
546:)
542:|
538:(
504:(
484:(
458:)
451:✉
448:(
416:(
393:)
386:✉
383:(
354:(
338:)
331:✉
328:(
295:(
279:)
272:✉
269:(
242:)
234:·
228:·
220:·
213:·
207:·
201:·
195:·
190:(
182:(
179:)
172:·
165:)
127:(
112:)
108:(
67:T
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.