Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Believe the Promise

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 delete. Note: Consensus would not preclude a redirect. j⚛e decker ^talk 02:15, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I Believe the Promise[edit]

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

De-PRODed again with sources that are nothing more than track listings. Album does not meet WP:NALBUMS. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:57, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Philg88 ^♦talk 08:24, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Philg88 ^♦talk 08:25, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - No evidence of any notability. –Davey2010 • (talk) 22:41, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Per nom. Non-notable album fails WP:NALBUMS. No significant coverage found in reliable sources. Philg88 ^♦talk 05:12, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment On 19 June 2014 the nominator PRODed some 50+ Hillsong-related articles see here. From 21 June I noticed this list and that some 10+ of these PRODs were charting albums at either ARIA or Billboard. I have gone through more of the 50+ list and added sources where possible and dePRODed any that I felt had a reliable source for their existence. I was hoping to get time to supply further sources to attempt to establish notability. With so many articles to research this is not necessarily achievable in a short time-frame. The nominator has sent most of the dePRODed articles straight to AfD. I ask for time/assistance in actually searching for sources to support the articles' notability.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:50, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak keep~~ I found a review by Cross Rhythms, so there very well may be other sources out there. I also think this album has been misclassified as a Hillsong release, as Cross Rhythms, AllMusic, and Jesus Freak Hideout (the latter two are purely database entries) consider it a Darlene Zschech release.--¿3family6 _contribs 20:13, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment With only one source, we can't assume that others exist. Either they have to be produced or we assume non-notable based on a single source. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:49, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  - Agreed that it needs more than one significant mention. Hence my hesitancy to give it a full "keep" vote. But I'm not convinced that there is nothing else written about this album. I haven't done a site search of all the sources on WP:CCM/S, and there could be offline references.--¿3family6 _contribs 00:57, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
    - If you agree it has to be more than one, then it should be weak delete, no? The problem with a weak keep is it's essentially a keep and closing admin may interpret it as such. If the decision is closed as "keep", it makes it difficult to delete at a future time. However, if the decision is "delete", the article can be create when additional sources are found. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:16, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete I'm changing my vote, as I have now done a search through most of the relevant sources on WP:CCM/S. There may be something buried in the Wayback Machine archives, but that's on the burden of the article creator to find. This article is on the threshold of being kept, but I can't find any additional sources apart from a brief footnote in a book.--¿3family6 _contribs 14:50, 25 June 2014 (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.