Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Once Upon a Time: The Singles

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. ⇌ Jake Wartenberg 01:55, 24 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Once Upon a Time: The Singles[edit]

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

Does this need to exist? What more could be added to this article? I think it's very rare for a greatest-hits-album to warrant its own article – it has to have some sort of historical merit or importance within the band's ouvre, such as Singles Going Steady, for example, which is arguably more well-known than that band's studio albums. Lachlan Foley 09:29, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:56, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. No real reason put forward for deletion. This was a hit album that spent six months in the UK Albums Chart. Pretty much every music publication of the era would have reviewed it. --Michig (talk) 19:07, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the artist's article. The coverage may exist, but it's not really significant enough to justify keeping a separate article. Ducknish (talk) 19:44, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The combination of coverage (with more presumably offline), chart placements, and accolades that have been added to the article should be enough to demonstrate that it meets WP:NALBUMS. Gong show 23:39, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:BEFORE and refs in article. In ictu oculi (talk)
Keep. As this album is considered to be a classic by critics, this has to be kept. Carliertwo (talk) 19:07, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This album received plenty of coverage in reliable sources, plus some major chart success. Meets our guidelines for inclusion. — sparklism ^hey! 07:54, 20 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.