Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rock-A-Doodle (soundtrack)

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 Rock-a-Doodle#Soundtrack. Ultimately I found the merge arguments to be more convincing than the straight keeps; namely, that the soundtrack reviews tended to also contain coverage of the film, and the coverage in the film reviews is effectively secondary to that of the film. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 23:38, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rock-A-Doodle (soundtrack)[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)

Was originally nominated as part of a bundle nomination of equally non-significantly-covered animated soundtrack albums, but commenters ignorant about the coverage of the topics tried to convince me they were somehow individually notable. The commenters used lousy reasoning, or WP:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, in trying to suggest certain topics in that nomination had individual notability. One suggested a couple of albums were by notable artists, including this one which is credited to Glenn Campbell. This means nothing as Notability is not inherited. Only thing this album has gotten is an Allmusic review, and a couple of blog posts [1] [2]. That does not establish notability. 👨x🐱 (talk) 17:22, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 17:23, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:57, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Rock-a-Doodle#Soundtrack. Much of the information here already appears in the Soundtrack section of the article about the film. This soundtrack appears to have received little coverage on its own (I have found no full reviews, nor any indication that it hit any music charts), so covering it in the film's article should be sufficient. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 19:46, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, does one not think that an established artist like Glen Campbell didn't have coverage when the album was originally released? This is not some unknown person, nothing he has released has flown under the wire at the time of release. Maybe now, 30 years on, nothing can be found online since not everything has been digitalized and archived. Donaldd23 (talk) 19:55, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia is not a crystal ball, and we cannot assume the album has print coverage we don't know about just because Glenn Campbell recorded it. Mind providing any evidence you found there are legit sources covering this thing? 👨x🐱 (talk) 20:19, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Allmusic (a reliable source per Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources) rated it one and half stars [[3]] That and the LA Times should be enough for WP:GNG. Donaldd23 (talk) 21:00, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - No. AllMusic is reliable but that alone does not establish notability, and LATimes does not talk about the soundtrack LP itself. It talks about the film. 👨x🐱 (talk) 21:55, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
comment I've added one article from the Los Angeles Times. Will look for others. 1990s coverage is often behind a wall. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 20:56, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- LA Times cite is about film, not the soundtrack LP. 👨x🐱 (talk) 21:54, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Did I say it was about the LP? Nope. I just provided a citation for some of the info in the wp article. And the Los Angeles Times article cited is a feature on Campbell and his role in the film, not the film overall. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 22:21, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to the film as most of the coverage is about the animated film as a whole (though the soundtrack is covered). The nominator ought to consider merging articles like this with their film articles before bringing to AfD and only bring to AfD if the merges are reverted. Would save researchers some time. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 21:04, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Rock-A-Doodle. Trivialist (talk) 01:39, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - There are some issues with the copy/pasted reasoning in the rush of 21 different AfDs for cartoon soundtracks by this nominator. In short, blanket reasoning for an attempted bundled AfD has been applied to every individual album therein. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pebble and the Penguin (soundtrack) for more details. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:07, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, although it's a weak lean to that. Full-length review dedicated solely to the soundtrack in Citizen's Voice (30 June 1992, page 23), mixed film/soundtrack review in LA Weekly (18 June 1992, page 78). It's an interesting one to search, as the soundtrack is such a part of the film that the film's reviews discuss it a lot, in a way on the border of sigcov. Considering that significant reviews of the soundtrack alone exist, I'm inclined to lean weakly towards the combination of them with borderline sigcov elsewhere makes for a GNG pass. Vaticidalprophet 15:30, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The soundtrack album received some reliable reviews as found by the other "keep" voters above. Perhaps the soundtrack only got noticed because Glen Campbell was involved, and the coverage is still pretty thin, but there is enough for a basic stub article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:42, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as per the significant coverage identified in this discussion such as Citizen's Voice, LA Weekly, AllMusic so that WP:GNG is passed in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 00:39, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Rock-a-Doodle: 99,99% of coverage is related to the film CommanderWaterford (talk) 11:11, 30 April 2021 (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.