Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hopestrumentals

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 Hope (Non-Prophets album). (non-admin closure) ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 09:00, 20 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hopestrumentals[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)

The article has been unsourced since Feb 2007. After 15 years, I think a deletion discussion is appropriate. Coin945 (talk) 08:57, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 08:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

~~Speedy keep~~, the nominator does not propose a valid WP:DEL-REASON. The nominator does not say which notability guideline that this article fails to meet. SailingInABathTub (talk) 10:20, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep all of Coin945's AfDs from today as a procedural matter. Coin945 has nominated 72 articles in a short space of time with a questionable rationale ("long-term lack of sourcing" -- see WP:NEXIST) and no indication of WP:BEFORE, with @Uncle G finding that a number of them can have their notability confirmed on literally the first page of Google results. This is not something the relatively small group of people who work AfD can realistically handle. Vaticidalprophet 11:01, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Keep/Procedural Keep and improve. As stated by the other voters above, this nomination is illegitimate per WP:DEL-REASON, WP:BEFORE, and WP:NEXIST. I would also cite WP:NODEADLINE and WP:NOTCLEANUP. The proper thing is to try to improve the article first, and that's how you really know if it is hopeless or if it has potential. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:20, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

When this is over, my recommendation is to merge or redirect to Hope (Non-Prophets album), because this instrumental bonus release seems quite obscure. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:42, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You can go ahead and make that recommendation now, redirect or merge are possible results of AfD.--Rusf10 (talk) 20:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

My position is that this remains an invalid deletion nomination, and if the nominator had done any WP:BEFORE work, perhaps they would have found redirecting to be viable. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 00:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's a shame. Rather than help us come to a consensus on what to do with the article, you'd rather obstruct the process through bureaucracy.--Rusf10 (talk) 03:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Well, that's a shame too. Redirecting was initially my idea, since adopted by four other people (including you), but then I get accused of obstruction and bureaucracy. If the consensus of this AfD is to redirect or merge, I will do it myself. You forgot the nominator's careless misuse of the rather serious AfD process and a lesson should be sent to that person. I support a redirect as the ultimate outcome, because once again it was my idea. You're welcome. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect I can't find sources for this, except retailers, I do agree with Doomsdayer520 a merge/redirect would be quite beneficial and a must do. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 14:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hope (Non-Prophets album), not a separately notable topic. Reywas92^Talk 18:19, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per Reywas92's proposal.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect seems to be right. Maybe with just a quick mention that an instrumental version also exists.--Rusf10 (talk) 20:51, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect, with Hope (Non-Prophets album). Not independently notable, does not pass WP:NMUSIC. I would have preferred a merge, but I can't find any WP:RS on this at all. SailingInABathTub (talk) 22:33, 16 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.