Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Carolina Jubilee

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 keep. Many of those in favour of deletion were saying that the article should be deleted because the existing content is terrible. However, that's not really a valid deletion reason, because many articles have risen from the ashes to become quite substantial and excellent FAs. A good example of this is MDAC. Other deletion reasons were that the songs aren't notable, or the band isn't notable. However, MarkBul pointed out a few external links that tend to indicate that the songs' notability. Therefore, my decision is to keep these articles. Ta bu shi da yu 00:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A Carolina Jubilee

A Carolina Jubilee (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

I am nominating this and the following articles because I feel that these album pages will never be anything more than track lists. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 21:51, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Also nominated for deletion for the same reasons outlined above...
  • Strong keep: Studio albums by notable artists. The fact they are currently short is not a valid reason for deletion, neither is the fact you think they will not be expanded. I personally doubt that the mass-created stubs on Eastern European villages which I see so often on new page patrol will be expanded, but deleting them would be a ridiculous thing to do. J Milburn 22:18, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment What makes the artists notable? Certainly not any good references. The Washington Post citation goes to the WP Wikipedia page. I'd be tempted to recommend the band for AfD, and the albums certainly show no evidence of notability. Until I see some legit references, I'm leaning hard towards Delete. MarkBul 22:27, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Whether the band is notable is a seperate issue. As for whether the albums are notable- Emotionalism at Stylus Magazine, Emotionalism at Paste Magazine, A Carolina Jubilee at Harp Magazine, A Carolina Jubilee at Rockzillaworld, Mignonette at Paste Magazine, Mignonette at Independent Weekly (not any of the Independent Weeklys we have articles on) Four Thieves Gone at Prefix Magazine, Four Thieves Gone at PopMatters. That easily establishes the band's notability, and, even ignoring the fact that studio albums from notable artists are considered automatically notable, goes well on the way to establishing the notability for the albums. J Milburn 22:46, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment From WP:MUSIC "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article, space permitting.". Sound familiar? MarkBul 00:46, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
      • I knew that articles containing merely track listings were deletable, but I totally forgot about WP:MUSIC. Thanks MarkBul. If you have any questions, please contact me at my talk page. Ian Manka 03:55, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
        • There isn't really space in the main article for all of them, (especially if someone was to write the others) and merging them in there would discourage expansion of the album articles, which is not a good thing. I still think they should keep their own articles. They do have a little more than tracklistings, in the form of the infoboxes. It would get horribly crowded if all the infoboxes were piled in. I think that idea is more for band articles that consist of a paragraph and a couple of external links, with an album article with a single line, no infobox and a tracklisting. THEN I could see a case for merging, especially if there wasn't actually any other available infomation about the album. Here, as those excellent sources demonstrate (and there are interviews available too) the articles could quite easily be expanded. J Milburn 10:50, 23 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Either Delete or Expland - Irrespective of notability of artist, the page needs to be expanded to be more than a tracklisting before the end of this AfD, otherwise a simple line on the artist's page will suffice. A1octopus 16:46, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
    • I think you mean "expand" :-) Ta bu shi da yu 00:16, 2 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep but expand. Niaz(Talk • Contribs) 09:08, 29 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletions. —User:Ceyockey (talk to me) 13:19, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete unless expanded beyond a track listing. Nuttah68 18:55, 1 October 2007 (UTC)
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.