Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Redemption Song: The Ballad Of Joe Strummer

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. (non-admin closure) Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 01:52, 20 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redemption Song: The Ballad Of Joe Strummer

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

Book with no evidence of notability. Albacore (talk) 02:14, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:34, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Major book from a major press on a major subject, with plenty of RS out there demonstrating notability. Classify as stub. Qworty (talk) 03:47, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
If you could provide said reliable sources, that would be good. If not, there's absolutely no verifiable content. Ironholds (talk) 05:50, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Needs expansion but is obviously notable given a Google search: NPR, New York Times, The American Conservative, Mother Jones, Seattle Weekly, PopMatters, Paste, Times Daily, Los Angeles Times, York Daily Record, SPIN. Undoubtedly a poor article that should have had more in it when created, but there's also little doubt that this is a suitable subject for an article.--Michig (talk) 07:13, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep in line with Michig's sources. Ironholds (talk) 11:49, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - maybe not as notable as Our Band Could Be Your Life (which thankfully has "no elvis, beatles, or the rolling stones"[1]), but certainly notable enough to keep. Editorially, I'd also like it to be integrated somehow into appropriate places in the Clash/Strummer articles. I don't know if there are other notable bios that should merit mention there as well.--Milowent • ^talkblp-r 15:43, 14 January 2011 (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.