Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Now That's What I Call R&B (3rd nomination)

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 delete. Based on the discussion, I'm wondering if the whole series of these articles should be deleted by the same logic, but that's way out of scope for this AfD, so no action on that. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:10, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

After I closed this, @Peter James: contacted me and pointed out some issues with my original close. Upon closer evaluation, I've come to the conclusion that I may have made an error, so I'm re-closing this a no consensus (and restoring the article). No prejudice against immediately relisting this on AfD if anybody feels that's appropriate. Pinging the other participants to make sure they're aware. @Anthony Appleyard: @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars: @Davey2010: @Ad Orientem: -- RoySmith (talk) 16:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now That's What I Call R&B

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

Re-creation Anthony Appleyard (talk) 05:49, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 12:45, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a different album with the same title. The deleted article was about an album released in the US and possibly only sold in Walmart stores; this is about an album released in the UK and Ireland later in the same year that was top 10 in the UK's compilations and downloads charts. Peter James (talk) 19:37, 19 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Now That's What I Call Music! discography. The title's a bit ambiguous if there were different versions released in multiple areas. These Now! albums sell well no matter what without receiving any significant coverage in reliable sources, so charting in and of itself doesn't seem to be enough to warrant its own article. --00:43, 23 May 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk • contribs)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔ 17:15, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as notable UK album. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 18:16, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Four charting songs clearly rings the notability bell for this album. But I am tagging it for ref improve. -Ad Orientem (talk) 00:25, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note that all of the songs on the album charted before the album was ever released. That's what these Now albums are all about: compilations of current hit songs. The album has NOTHING to do with the charting of these songs and each is completely independent of the album. Notability is not inherited. Significant coverage of the album in reliable sources does not exist. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 17:10, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Changing !vote based on comment by Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ad Orientem (talk • contribs) 18:40, 26 May 2014

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.