Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Betrayal, Fear, Anger, Hatred (EP)

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) Tim Song (talk) 00:14, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Betrayal, Fear, Anger, Hatred (EP)[edit]

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

No sources found to establish notability. Only ghits are discographies. Per WP:NALBUMS, this small track listing stub should be deleted and merged with the main band page. SnottyWong talk 01:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 02:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Plenty notable release by notable band. AFD is not the place to propose a merge.--Michig (talk) 07:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Can you provide independent, reliable, third-party sources to establish notability of this album (not the band itself, but the album)? SnottyWong talk 12:18, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - See the article. And it's an EP, not an album.--Michig (talk) 12:21, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - The two references in the article that I can access over the Internet are mostly about the album Mama, which is the album that the four tracks from this EP were eventually included on. Perhaps this article would be better merged into Mama (Nomeansno album)? SnottyWong talk 21:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Michig's findings and expansion. Gongshow ^Talk 18:16, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
As far as basic notability goes, the only criterion an album has to meet is that the band that recorded it is notable enough for inclusion — the question of whether the album should have a separate article, or a redirect to the band's article or to a discography, isn't a matter of establishing an independent claim of notability for the album in isolation, but of whether it's an article about the album or just a track listing. This is an actual, referenced article about an album by a notable band, so keep. Bearcat (talk) 22:22, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Even though it looks like this AfD is going to end up being a Keep, I'd just like to clarify that just because a band is notable does not automatically mean that every album they created is notable enough for its own album. WP:NALBUMS states that if a band is notable enough for an article, then an album by that band may be notable enough for its own article, but any article on wikipedia still has to satisfy WP:GNG. SnottyWong talk 02:56, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You need to reread my comment if you think that anything in it is in contradiction with policy — I didn't say that every release by a notable band is automatically entitled to a standalone article regardless of referencing. But every release by a notable band is entitled to be either a standalone article, if legitimate references are present (which they are here), or a redirect to the band's main article or discography. Bearcat (talk) 18:01, 4 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Bearcat. DigitalC (talk) 19:53, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per Michig.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:15, 5 December 2009 (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.