Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/17 Reasons

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 and while I'm not sure one will develop on the Talk with respect to merger, it's clear one isn't going to develop here. Star Mississippi 15:47, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

17 Reasons

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject fails WP:NALBUMS and GNG. This has been repeatedly redirected and restored making this redirect costly. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Link 80. Could only find fanzine coverage which is not considered reliable to my knowledge. the Punknews review is not labeled as a staff review and so is also not an acceptable source. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 00:03, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: added 2 reviews to page. [1] and [2] the second of which is from an article on essential ska albums. J04n(talk page) 01:54, 18 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:13, 24 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would consider established fanzines reliable when it comes to opinions (i.e. reviews). They have a firmly established place within subculture, and would be a considerably better source than if a mainstream newspaper suddenly tried to dip its toes in the scene. There is of course a considerable difference between MRR, Flipside (fanzine) and Punk Planet and someone's entirely new fanzine. Whereas reviews are fine, capsule reviews don't contribute to notability, but can be added nonetheless. I found a capsule review here and a somewhat longer review here. Geschichte (talk) 13:10, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 00:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relist, so far editors are split between delete, redirect and keep. If I were closing I'd be interested in more discussion as to whether/why the sources show notability.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 04:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Weak keep to weak merge. The two sources J04n (01:54, 18 January 2024) added do show notability, the first, yes some, the second yes but it is covering all their albums and I read it as supporting a merge to Link 80. This merge if a good idea should not be rushed from AfD, and in the meantime, this page on a borderline independently notable album is ok. SmokeyJoe (talk) 01:08, 14 February 2024 (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.