Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiss of Fury

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 11:47, 20 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Kiss of Fury[edit]

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

Non notable album, no sources / references. Puffin ^{Let's talk!} 10:15, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:06, 7 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 20:06, 7 April 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, Mediran (t • c) 01:08, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Search fails to find any offline reviews (and very few online). Never charted. Fails WP:NALBUMS --| Uncle Milty | talk | 02:38, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak delete as per Uncle Milty. I think of the notability guidelines as more to prevent advertising or promotion of upcoming stuff (that is, I don't see the harm in articles about older stuff), but I'm not experienced enough to qualify for the third part of the "understand policy, experiment with policy, create/ignore policy" essay I read recently. ~~(Can't seem to find it now.)~~ WP:SHUARI. —Ignatzmice ^talk _contribs 08:51, 14 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.