Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Dwarves Must Die

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The result was Withdrawn by nominator Niteshift36 (talk) 00:19, 10 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Dwarves Must Die[edit]

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

Fails WP:NALBUMS. No evidence that it charted anywhere found at Allmusic or Billboard. No evidence of significant coverage by reliable sources. The sole source used by the article is a one paragraph review. 4 articles link to it. Niteshift36 (talk) 08:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep The Dwarves are notable, and so is the album per WP:NALBUMS: "In general, if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia." Reviews, etc here. Lugnuts (talk) 09:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The key word is "may". Look at the rest of NALBUMS: "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting.". The article is a single paragraph and a track listing. Niteshift36 (talk) 09:58, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Pitchfork review to add to Allmusic, Trouser Press, etc.--Michig (talk) 10:05, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finally one that is longer than a single paragraph. Whether is is enough remains to be seen. Niteshift36 (talk) 10:29, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also this article from The Age.--Michig (talk) 10:31, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You should use that for the Dwarves article, it helps establish their notability. But a single sentence mention of the album isn't going to look too significant to many people. Niteshift36 (talk) 10:35, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Are you kidding? The whole article is about The Dwarves Must Die.--Michig (talk) 10:39, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The last sentence of paragraph 2 and most of paragraph 3 is about the album. There rest doesn't look like it. Even if it all is, the 3.5 paragraphs is there because they were performing in a local bar a year after the album came out. It's coverage about the band performing locally so they talked about the last album. Either way, we'll see if that saves it.Niteshift36 (talk) 10:45, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:49, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, has some notability, even though very borderline. Article can use some expansion to better meet quality guidelines Alan - talk 18:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sigh loudly and Redirect to artistes article Once again AfD is clogged up with discussions about album articles when a simple redirect would have been easy and would have satisfied the guidelines Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 19:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

And I offered to Michig to withdraw the AfD if he wanted to redirect. He refused. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:01, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I still have some work to do on this one by adding a critical reception section. There's no case that I can see to redirect.--Michig (talk) 20:04, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - like everyone else I am copying and pasting my vote for all of the AfD's of the Dwarves albums, except for the quickie compilations. The nominator's reasons for the AfD's are roughly the same, everyone else's comments and votes are roughly the same. DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 20:48, 7 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The album appears to have received significant coverage from multiple sources (including Allmusic - I disagree with the nominator about the significance of the album's allmusic coverage.) Rlendog (talk) 03:39, 8 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The coverage for this album in the article's three current references (Allmusic, Pitchfork, The Age) is sufficient in my view to satisfy WP:NALBUMS. Gongshow ^Talk 06:00, 8 February 2010 (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.