Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amidst the Bloodshed

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. Stifle (talk) 12:52, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Amidst the Bloodshed[edit]

Non-notable album from a redlinked band. The PROD template was removed by the article's original author. Little Red Riding Hoodtalk 22:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Give it a chance will yah? I'm working on the article, but you guy's won't let me and it may not be notable, but I'm working on the problem right now,—I expanding it—and well I'm well aware of it being from a red linked article, but, I think if someone helped...well actually, if someone actually edited the article with me more, then it wouldn't be considered for deletion. So, please give me a chance...Give the article a chance...it may need work, but I think it shouldn't be deleted. So please don't delete! [[ User ]] (talk) 22:17, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- John Vandenberg ^(chat) 22:14, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy delete Album by red link band, no sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:10, 14 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Don't speedy delete Now it's got sources, view here, and well, I added them, but I'm looking for, so just too let you know, I'm not going to respond as much to the messages you or anybody gives if it involves this article, unless on the articles talkpage. [[ User ]] (talk) 00:39, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete--I agree with the Hammer and his otters. No notability (yet), and not very well written. Even given that there's less coverage for metal in the mainstream media than for other genres, this is simply not enough. "By a reviewer named" says it all, I think. Who is this reviewer? Etc. Delete. Drmies (talk) 00:37, 15 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: If you guy's and women wants it to be notable, then do it yourself. I'm angry at you users: you want Amidst the Bloodshed to be notable, but you guy's are relying on a regular user. I'm ashamed, I'm really ashamed on want you users are doing: you are abusing them. Making users do it themself, well then, I'm angry at you guy's, because I'm trying to satisfy you guy's and you are shunning into the wall, like you using me. I'm sick of that, I'm pushed around all day, I'm very angry at everyone and everything. And you guy's call youself helpful, I am really ashamed. You guy's should work on Amidst the Bloodshed instead of me. [[ User ]] (talk) 20:31, 16 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

We have been trying to work. I did a good-faith search for sources and found none. The fact that the band is a red link doesn't help things. In fact, since the band is a red link and there's no valid assertation of notability, I feel that the album meets the newly created criterion for non-notable albums. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 22:29, 16 October 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.