Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Pebble and the Penguin (soundtrack)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 merge to The Pebble and the Penguin#Music. (non-admin closure) Ashleyyoursmile! 05:40, 2 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Pebble and the Penguin (soundtrack)[edit]

The Pebble and the Penguin (soundtrack) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Was originally nominated as part of a bundle nomination of equally non-significantly-covered animated soundtrack albums, but commenters ignorant about the coverage of the topics tried to convince me they were somehow individually notable. The commenters used lousy reasoning, or WP:Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions, in trying to suggest certain topics in that nomination had individual notability. One suggested a couple of albums were by notable artists, which didn't make them notable as Notability is not inherited. Another agued "some of these articles are getting 100+ views/day", which is an invalid WP:POPULARPAGE argument. Another agued "Deleting the articles in question would delete the not insignificant article histories and revisions that could serve as rough drafts for future versions of these pages if they hold up to notability standards at a later date", which is invalid as most of these soundtracks never do and even so, we are not a WP:CRYSTALBALL.

Having one allmusic review does not establish notability. Being a soundtrack of a Don Bluth film does not establish independent notability. Having the kick-ass Tim Curry on your soundtrack album doesn– yeah, you get the idea. Fails WP:GNG and WP:SIGCOV. 👨x🐱 (talk) 14:14, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:36, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - There are about 21 AfDs by this nominator on cartoon movie soundtrack albums, mostly featuring repeated rationales. Those various AfDs can each be handled on their own merits, but the nominator is using WP:CRYSTALBALL incorrectly. That guideline is used to delete articles on things that have not yet happened. All of these cartoon soundtracks were released in the past, some decades ago, so they are not future items that violate WP:CRYSTALBALL. The nominator has accused someone of arguing that sources might exist, which is actually a violation of the WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES fallacy. That fallacy also happened for a previous bundled nomination and cannot be applied to ALL of the separate nominations that are now waiting for votes. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:57, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • You didn't read my comments carefully. I didn't use WP:CRYSTALBALL as a reason to nominate the article. I used WP:Crystalball in response to another commenter's argument suggesting to keep them for their revision histories in case they became notable in the future, which is WP:CRYSTALBALL to assume they will. 👨x🐱 (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • You'd also want to watch your other allegations. Only the introductory paragraphs have I copied for all of the cartoon soundtrack Afds, and they all end in a second paragraph commenting about the specific nominated topic. 👨x🐱 (talk) 16:03, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • All of the AfDs start with the same lengthy paragraph, with perhaps a few minor modifications, applying your dissatisfaction with your procedurally disastrous bundled AfD to every single one of those albums regardless of their individual merits. Your second paragraphs are valid but with far less detail. And you totally used the CRYSTALBALL standard incorrectly, and since it appears again and again and again (x21) in all of your AfDs, you can't say you didn't use it as a rationale for all of them. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 16:31, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • (1) Please stop WP:GASLIGHTING and saying I used it as a rationale for all comments. You're well aware I responded to a comment of that bundle discussion and didn't use WP:CRYSTALBALL as a rationale. (2) Listen, all the articles were nominated in that bundle, so of course I'm gonna use the same introduction to that bundle nomination in those other articles I later individually nominated for commenters to get context that will help them make their comments. It's a more efficient process than repeatedly typing differently-word paragraphs stating the same message. 👨x🐱 (talk) 20:43, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge without comment, that I have made elsewhere, on the merit of the nominations. Archival searches find passing mentions as an aside to the Thumbelina soundtrack, which Manilow made contemporaneously and appears to have gotten far more attention from mid-90s media sources. Nonetheless, the article isn't in bad shape, and if current policy insists it is unacceptable as a stand-alone article its verifiable content should be preserved nonetheless. Vaticidalprophet 15:18, 25 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge to The Pebble and the Penguin#Music. The soundtrack received some notice due to Barry Manilow's involvement and it has a basic AllMusic review. Vaticidalprophet (above) may be able to find some obscure newspaper reviews, but it appears to me that soundtrack-specific coverage is limited. Therefore the soundtrack can be covered with some viable sources at the film's article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 16:37, 25 April 2021 (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.