Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Glam-rok

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 merge to Fireflight discography. (non-admin closure) Michaelzeng7 (talk) 21:57, 2 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Glam-rok[edit]

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

An unremarkable album that does not appear to meet notability criteria. Walter Görlitz (talk) 02:21, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:12, 12 January 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, Courcelles 02:56, 19 January 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, -- Cheers, Riley 00:07, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Fireflight discography. An article on the album isn't justified, but there is content here that should be retained. --Michig (talk) 09:17, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and redirect to Fireflight discography, content can be added logically there and non-notable albums are conventionally redirected to the band's discography article (if it exists) or the band's article (if it does not). - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:20, 28 January 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.