Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Platinum Collection Volume 2: Shout to the Lord 2

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. Michig (talk) 10:35, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The Platinum Collection Volume 2: Shout to the Lord 2[edit]

I would like to withdraw my nomination based on charting. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:48, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

De-PRODed but does not meet WP:NALBUMS. Supplied source is nothing more than a track listing. Walter Görlitz (talk) 04:02, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Philg88 ^♦talk 08:23, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Philg88 ^♦talk 08:24, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom - No evidence of any notability. –Davey2010 • (talk) 22:42, 22 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Delete. Switched per new charting reference. ~~Per nom. Non-notable album fails WP:NALBUMS. No significant coverage found in reliable sources.~~ Philg88 ^♦talk 05:10, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment On 19 June 2014 the nominator PRODed some 50+ Hillsong-related articles see here. From 21 June I noticed this list and that some 10+ of these PRODs were charting albums at either ARIA or Billboard. I have gone through more of the 50+ list and added sources where possible and dePRODed any that I felt had a reliable source for their existence. I was hoping to get time to supply further sources to attempt to establish notability. With so many articles to research this is not necessarily achievable in a short time-frame. The nominator has sent most of the dePRODed articles straight to AfD. I ask for time/assistance in actually searching for sources to support the articles' notability.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 09:53, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Reviewed by Cross Rhythms, and charted on the Top Christian Albums chart (see page 60). I highly suspect that as a charting album there are more sources out there, they will just take more than a quick g-hits search to find.--¿3family6 _contribs 19:52, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Walter Görlitz: You can't withdraw when there are delete !votes. See WP:WDAFD. Philg88 ^♦talk 05:14, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. We'll let it play-out then. Walter Görlitz (talk) 06:38, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mz7 (talk) 01:10, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep although not a fan of popular gospel music, as the album has charted it has notability, a point even the nominator concedes.Dan arndt (talk) 14:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per 3family6 research above.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 08:47, 3 July 2014 (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.