Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sick Love

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) DavidLeighEllis (talk) 16:53, 30 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sick Love[edit]

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

Doesn't indicate notability. Laun chba ller 10:25, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:53, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:53, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The article could do with some work, but this release received a reasonable amount of attention in the music press at the time. I'll have a look for sources a little later., 阝工巳几千凹父工氐 (talk) 06:59, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Passes general notability guidelines. Sources include but are not limited to the following: [1][2][3][4] SarahStierch (talk) 17:14, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 00:21, 25 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The Allmusic and NME reviews found by User:SarahStierch show that it's notable enough. --Michig (talk) 06:57, 25 November 2013 (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.