Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber Of Fleet Street Deluxe Complete Edition

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 I'm not seeing a clear consensus to delete this and decisions on whether to merge/redirect are an editing decision that doesn't need AFD to dictate for an article about an album released less then 10 days ago. Lets see how this develops and we can then merge or retain the article as circumstances suggest. Default to no consensus. Spartaz ^Humbug! 22:33, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber Of Fleet Street Deluxe Complete Edition[edit]

{{la|Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber Of Fleet Street Deluxe Complete Edition|View AfD]])</includeonly>(View log)}

This belongs in the main article, I believe. This seems to be unnecessary and an non-notable score. The original score, by Sondheim, was definitely notable. However the film uses the same score as the musical, thus this article is redundant to other articles. Mayhaps a Merge? Marlith ^T/C 01:41, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete way too soon for this to be WP:N. JJL (talk) 01:42, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I believe that the content was part of the film article and spun off by Alientraveller so the article would not be lengthened by a track listing. Perhaps it's best to exclude track listings altogether from film articles, as they can be found on any website that has the soundtrack to purchase. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 01:54, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007 film). The film article isn't long enough to warrant splitting. --brew crewer (yada, yada) 02:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The NYT had a 2000 word story last Sunday interviewing Sondheim about all the changes in the score for the movie. Mykej (talk) 02:19, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Still, we can use that in the main article. Marlith ^T/C 03:09, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment but was it about the score itself as opposed to this 'Deluxe Complete Edition' of it? If the score changes are notable, then they deserve an article, or mention at the film's page. Unless the story covered the 'Deluxe Complete Edition' of the score rather than how what is on it differs from what was in the original musical, I don't see this as very relevant. JJL (talk) 02:14, 22 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge at the moment due to length. If editors wish to expand it (reviews, detail about compositions, etc), that's different. The JPS ^{talk to me} 14:40, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or merge (to generate consensus) per the above. Unnecessary and unnotable. Eusebeus (talk) 18:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep if more information is added, otherwise Merge into movie article. FallenWings47 17:00, 20 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Notability is established. Alansohn (talk) 18:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per notability and verifiability. Sincerely, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 21:24, 24 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, notable soundtrack of a notable film Hektor (talk) 15:19, 25 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber of Fleet Street (2007 film). At the moment it's just a track listing with a cast list that can already be found in the film's main page, not enough to establish notability. •97198 talk 10:35, 26 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The scores of major motion picture musicals have their own articles. Cool Hand Luke 20:56, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge. I agree that the album is somewhat notable, but not outside the subject of the film (at least for now, but we're not a crystal ball either.) Even if a subject is notable and verifiable it does not need a separate article, it may have a stand-alone article. If there are arguments towards keeping it separate, users should give suggestions on how it can be expanded. Otherwise, we should merge small articles with little information into broader topics wherever possible; after all, we're not out to creating thousands of permanent stub articles but rather complete and comprehensive articles. Our own notability guidelines on music albums establishes that: Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article, space permitting. With the article in its current state, I suggest we do just that. - Mtmelendez ^(Talk) 21:23, 27 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge - lack of substantial content. Addhoc (talk) 21:37, 27 December 2007 (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.