Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bug Sessions Volume Two

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 Redirect by myself. Volume One was redirected, and Volume Three was deleted (then redirected), so I see no reason why this shouldn't be too, especially after the 800 relistings, as this would put it in line with WP:MUSIC. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:26, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Bug Sessions Volume Two

Self released album only available on tour. No claim in article of meeting WP:MUSIC; album has not charted per allmusic and no professional reviews found. Contested prod. Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:56, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:57, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep See no difference between Bug Sessions Volume One smooth0⁷0₇ (talk) 17:21, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- See WP:OTHERSTUFF. Bug Sessions Volume One is now prodded, as it has the same issues.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 18:03, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The other article was prodded by you. That shows me nothing. I agree per below, these articles can be sourced, just are lacking sources. I can't understand why you are so eager to delete articles than can be salvaged. smooth0⁷0₇ (talk) 01:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If they can be salvaged (ie notability can be demonstrated), then I strongly encourage you to add the sources which show notability. If notability is demonstrated, I will gladly remove the prods myself and change my !vote here to keep. I have made a good faith effort to find the sources myself that would show notability and I haven't discovered them -- if you can find them where I failed, you'll get my sincere thanks.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:09, 21 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. WP:MUSIC clearly states that "In general, if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia." Yes, these articles need sources, but that in itself is not a compelling reason for deletion. Rwiggum (^Talk/_Contrib) 04:26, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You might want to read that passage from WP:MUSIC again. It says albums may be notable, not are automatically notable. Notability for an album still needs to be established; there is a lot of AfD precedent for this.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:30, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- To complete the passage "Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Demos, mixtapes, bootlegs, promo-only, and unreleased albums are in general not notable; however, they may be notable if they have significant independent coverage in reliable sources." Don't cherry pick lines from guidelines out of context, this is considered to be gaming the system. --neon white talk 16:43, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

***Could you please explain to me how this extra passage eliminates the requirement for notability to be established for the album itself? I read this as reinforcing the requirement for independent reliable sources, not conferring automatic notability. Obviously you are reading this differently, and I'd like to understand where you're coming from. (And please don't accuse me of gaming the system. Thanks.)--Fabrictramp | talk to me 16:57, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - My abject apologies. I didn't pay enough attention to the indents, and I see now that Neon white wasn't replying to me.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 17:06, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This one does fail WP:MUSIC. It has not recieved any attention in reliable sources. It fails WP:RS. Undead Warrior (talk) 23:09, 20 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Saves the Day as a plausible search term. Fails notability for lacking "significant independent coverage in reliable sources" per WP:MUSIC#Albums. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 11:45, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Stifle (talk) 10:26, 22 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 23:00, 27 September 2008 (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.