Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dream Home Heartache

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 keep. J04n(talk page) 01:45, 5 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dream Home Heartache[edit]

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

Non-notable album, which fails WP:NALBUMS. No sign of any substantial coverage, or of evidence that it charted.

The onky refence in the article is a link to allmusic.com, which is only 140 words. That's well short of the significant coverage required by WP:GNG, and I haven't found any other reviews.

The article does contain an unreferenced assertion that a tour in support of the album led to a riot in Mexico City. If true, that might have prompted further coverage of the album, but the event is not mentioned in the artcles on the album's two creators (Rozz Williams and Gitane Demone), so it may not have been a very significant riot. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:50, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. An album by two notable artists (see Wikipedia:OUTCOMES#Music), released by a notable record label, well received by reviewers. I've added another review quote to the article. I have no doubt that this will have been covered by alternative music/rock music/goth culture magazines at the time of release, but I don't have to anything like that, so I cannot provide citations at this time. This was released long before the Internet was flourishing, and so the liklihood of finding many reviews online is slim to none. (Also, tagging as of questionable notability and throwing in citation needed tags immediately before nominating for deletion is hardly good form. The information requested can be found in the linked sources.) J Milburn (talk) 14:27, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I've found an article that was in Trouser Press; probably a great number of magazines like this will have covered the album. The majority of them, though, are not going to be accessible online, or within easy reach of me personally. I'm not sure quite how much you want... J Milburn (talk) 15:44, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  - I've found some obituaries of Williams which list the album as a significant example of his work- how are they? One was apparently in NME (scroll to the bottom), though I don't have a full citation. This is another magazine which may well have reviewed the album, but I do not have access to an archive to check. Again, how much are you wanting? Sure, I've not expanded the article to featured status, but I'm confident I've demonstrated that the subject is notable... J Milburn (talk) 16:04, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
    - Good work on finding refs, but AFAICS they fall well short of WP:GNG requirements:
      1) The Truser Press ref is actually one para in a long article about lots of stuff.
      3) The Projekt Darkwave ref is a review of compilation album which includes one track from the album. that track is mentioned briefly in two places on the pages.
      3) The link above includes a half-para on this album.
      The sources look reliable, but these 3 brief mentions fall well short of significant coverage in reliable sources. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:51, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. While there may not be a wealth of coverage available online, it is generally wrong to assume that a Google search will return all available coverage. Albums by notable artists generally receive coverage (in print sources as well as online) and this one has enough to make it worth keeping the article - Google Books also shows some coverage in Mick Mercer's The Hex Files: The Goth Files and GNews has an article (paywalled) in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution, possibly a review and there's a Rolling Stone article that describes the album as "a bluesy cabaret album" (certainly not significant coverage but still valid as a source). --Michig (talk) 17:45, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep (or merge LOSSLESSLY) - Per this discussion, the album and its details should (at a minimum) be merged LOSSLESSLY into Rozz Williams or Gitane Dimone. That being said, I concur with Milburn on keeping the article. --Jax 0677 (talk) 18:19, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Nonsense. Jax should stop misrepresenting the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music)#Merging_of_non-notable_albums. There is no requirement to merge, let alone to merge losslessly. The guidance at Wikipedia:Notability (music)#If_the_subject_is_not_notable remains that info on non-notable topics "may be included in other ways in Wikipedia, provided that certain conditions are met". There is definitely no requirements to splat a musician's article with the tracklist of a non-notable album. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:52, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I believe the above editors have sufficiently proven that the album is notable to a degree separate from its creators enough to justify an article. Ducknish (talk) 21:08, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:47, 29 March 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.