Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pissed Tae Th' Gills

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 redirect to The Real McKenzies#Discography. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:32, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Pissed Tae Th' Gills[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Unsourced for nearly a decade and I couldn't find anything. That Internet Archive only has one result seems especially telling. Redirect to The_Real_McKenzies#Discography.

And while I'm here, does anyone know if the title is capitalised correctly? It is my understanding that "Tae Th'" is equivalent to "to the", and that would definitely be lowercase per MOS:TITLECAPS, but does the same apply here? Not that it'd matter if this gets wiped but it'd useful to know in general. QuietHere (talk) 17:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk) 17:16, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The_Real_McKenzies#Discography. Album on it's own is not notable as per WP:MUS. GoldMiner24 ^Talk 19:22, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think Wikipedia's guidelines for what albums are or are not notable is needlessly narrow and foolish. If the stated goal of this project is to be a collection of the worlds knowledge, then removal is counterproductive. It is an actual album by a notable band. Keeping it does not harm Wikipedia, and removing it would not improve Wikipedia. Therefore, I say let it stay. Natt the Hatt (talk) 22:34, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
First off, per WP:NMUSIC: "An album requires its own notability, and that notability is not inherited and requires independent evidence. That an album is an officially released recording by a notable musician or ensemble is not by itself reason for a standalone article." Your "actual album by a notable band" doesn't really matter here, especially given the sources on the Real McKenzies page are surprisingly very weak and the band themself might not actually be notable.

Secondly, notability has been a core tenet of Wikipedia for a very long time and those rules have remained agreed upon since at least 2007. If you disagree with them, that's fine, it's just that 1. This is not the place to bring that up and 2. You're probably not gonna get very far arguing against them.

And lastly, the problem with your "collection of the world's knowledge" logic is that if information is unsourced then we can't reasonably prove this "knowledge" to be true. WP:VERIFY is another core policy, and if we can't provide that for readers then we're failing the site's purpose at its most essential. Information in that article could be entirely made up for all I know because there's no material covering it to confirm those claims. Not that the article is making any seriously valuable claims, though the fact that it's sharing nothing more than a track list and release date, information found just as easily on sites like Discogs and Rate Your Music, is also a point against it since we're not really providing more than basic facts.

Empty calorie articles like these don't teach anyone anything that useful, and leave too much room for editors, even mistakenly/in good faith, to mislead readers by adding misinformation. I believe that is harmful to WP and its mission, and the site is better off without this kind of material, hence the rules being strictly opposed to it. QuietHere (talk) 05:29, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This entire stance violates WP:NOTINHERITED. And it does not matter if you approve of Wikipedia standards for notability. When you're on Wikipedia, that's what applies. It's WP:NOTAVOTE, you've got to give a valid argument on your stance. Sergecross73 msg me 20:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We need sources or we have no way to prove this isn't made up. Oaktree b (talk) 01:16, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - to band discography. Unsourced and almost devoid of content, and not particularly likely to change, as live albums often struggle to get coverage unless they're a pretty popular artist. Sergecross73 msg me 21:11, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Real McKenzies#Discography. Fails WP:NALBUM per nom. SBKSPP (talk) 05:56, 24 September 2022 (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.