Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solitude, Dominance, Tragedy

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 no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:30, 8 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Solitude, Dominance, Tragedy[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)

Fails WP:NALBUM. The coverage that I found of this album appears to mostly consist of passing mentions or not in-depth about the album itself, thus not satisfying the "multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it." of criterion #1. There has been no evidence that it charted to pass #2 either, with sverigetopplistan returning no results TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:20, 12 October 2020 (UTC); updated 18:36, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:20, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 04:20, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:41, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Notable album by a notable band. Heiko Gerber (talk) 17:00, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Heiko Gerber. Notable album by a notable band. Same goes for the rest of their albums which are also nominated for deletion. This guy has really gotten something against Evergrey, I tell y'all. :) He nominated their members and the band themselves for deletion. I mean, I am not a huge fan of them either (they are ok but I don't find them special) but they are notable for WP! GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:45, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Heiko Gerber, GhostDestroyer100, and Geschichte: Rationale updated. I am working through expanding and closing as appropriate. I assure you that I have nothing against the group, have never heard their music, or even knew they existed until last night when stumbling across numerous sub-par articles lacking independent notability. I am coming from a totally neutral prospective. In hindsight, I agree the Evergrey article nomination was incorrect and that I should have WP:BOLDly redirected the albums to Evergrey discography as they (for most part, from ones I nominated) lack sufficient coverage to warrant their own independent Wikipedia articles. The nomination of the main article was the reason that I did not redirect as if that one had closed as "delete", it would have automatically deleted these, which I felt they had too much of a revision history to be deleted automatically. I am unopposed to redirecting this and the others nominated. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 18:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@TheSandDoctor: I was just joking about you having something against Evergrey. That's why the smiley face is there. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 17:59, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all albums to Evergrey discography. The track listings can be condensed into collapsed templates there. BD2412 T 19:13, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to this. --TheSandDoctor ^Talk 20:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Per Heiko Gerber. I found some reliable sources which talk about the album: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5] and [6]. With these, the album is good enough to pass WP:NALBUM. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 16:00, 13 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Superastig: Please see the below
1. hardwired magazine does not cover the album in significant depth nor does Hardwired magazine appear a reliable source
2. metal-archives appears to be a user generated review, thus not doing anything for notability. It is also mentioned explicitly at the bottom of Wikipedia:WikiProject Metal#External links and WP:ALBUMAVOID as an unreliable source.
3. metal.de (as a whole) is a source that GhostDestroyer100 and I are sort of on the fence about. However, at one paragraph saying the album has a "lot of depth" (and not much more) it is hardly substantial (non-trivial) coverage.
4. sputnikmusic appears user generated (prominent "USER" disclaimer beside the reviewer's username, Kris/KJ), which does nothing for notability is not RS per WP:MUSICRS as it doesn't have a clearly identifiable tag stating it is either a staff or emeritus review.
5. metal-template Though the site itself is of potentially questionable notability (also not listed at WP:RSP), this is the first source with any depth whatsoever
6. whiplash.net is an interesting one, but whiplash.net does not exist as an article and it is not listed at WP:RSP. This calls its reliability into question for me.
--TheSandDoctor ^Talk 03:45, 14 October 2020 (UTC); amend based on new info 04:33, 16 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Barkeep49 (talk) 00:58, 21 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 08:59, 31 October 2020 (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.