- 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 to Eraser vs Yöjalka. MBisanz talk 21:54, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Round 1 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
The album has no significant coverage and the article contains no notable sources. An album must have stand-alone notability to warrant an article. Ben Knapp (talk) 04:45, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:36, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 10:36, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete Not enough coverage, and it doesn't seem to be a notable album. Koala15 (talk) 14:42, 31 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Theopolisme (talk) 00:54, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to the parent article Eraser vs Yöjalka, agree not sufficiently notable for a stand-alone page. J04n(talk page) 19:55, 13 April 2013 (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.