Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Octoberon

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 per WP:SNOW. (non-admin closure) J 947^{^{^{( c ) ^(m)}}} 18:38, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Octoberon[edit]

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

Unreferenced article with no indication of notability, PROD reverted. Jax 0677 (talk) 18:59, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

~~Redirect~~ to Barclay James Harvest. Zero logical reason for bringing this to AfD (or prodding, for that matter) when it's just going to get redirected per WP:ATD-R. A Train^talk 19:38, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, per sources cited below and per WP:NALBUM (changed position). A Train^talk 10:17, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 19:42, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. MassiveYR ♠ 19:42, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: this reached no. 19 in the UK (their second highest charting album) and no. 40 in Germany... there are almost certainly reviews of the album in the UK's music press of the time (and yes, I will look up the reviews if someone challenges me on this). Richard3120 (talk) 20:08, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not challenging you, exactly, Richard3120 but if you could produce sources that back that up then I'd change my position. A Train^talk 20:29, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem A Train, I'll try and do that in the next week – I just know that if I say "there must be reviews from the era" somebody is likely to say "prove it". Richard3120 (talk) 20:48, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Obviously notable album by a clearly notable band. Here's links to four reviews for starters, all trivially easy to find from a Google search: [1], [2], [3], [4]. --Michig (talk) 20:56, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Note. It also charted in the US ([5]). --Michig (talk) 20:59, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I added a few more links (and some of the same ones) on the articles talk page. Nominator once again failed to follow WP:BEFORE before taking article to AfD. Beginning to be a habit for him as he prefers to waste other people's time rather than his own. --Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 21:25, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - per above sources founding. These stupid nominations are getting disruptive again. Sergecross73 msg me 23:10, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. "Unreferenced" does not equal "no sources exist". This is a charting album with coverage in reliable sources. I added a few references to the article; the subject meets WP:NALBUM. gongshow talk 00:12, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per above. Just requires a little TLC and patience. - NsTaGaTr ^(Talk) 14:05, 18 October 2017 (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.