Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Anthology: The Temptations (1964-73)

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. Mangojuicetalk 00:14, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Anthology: The Temptations (1964-73)

Anthology: The Temptations (1964-73) (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs)

Not really much point in an article on this compilation. There's no content that can be added beyond its tracklisting. FuriousFreddy 00:01, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Speedy Keep. This article lists the songs of an album. Nimbat230 00:20, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete The Temptations are highly notable, but every reference to them isn't. This is just another compilation without any redeeming notability of its own. It might rate mention in the The Temptations article, at the very most. I do not understand Nimbat230's reasoning; listing song titles of an album does create notability for the album, even if these were new songs. --Bejnar 00:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete I agree with Benjar, no notability. If sales info were included or chart position showing notability I would be inclined to keep it. Mallanox 02:26, 2 January 2007 (UTC)Keep, vote changed following consideraton of Warren's comment. Mallanox 05:44, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per Benjar, while the Temptations are highly notable the album is not. — Arjun 03:08, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep Compilations of notable artists have precedence for being kept (the many for Rush), for example). A little work will fix this article. skrshawk ( Talk | Contribs ) 03:52, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, just reproducing a tracklisting is not sufficient for an article. If the article asserted why this compliation was particularly notable, then it would be suitable. Proto::► 12:42, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete, just another "Very Best of Greatest Hits". IMHO, compilations even by very notable bands aren't automatically notable. To be sure of its notability, I'd like to see information on chart performance or links to independant non-trivial reviews. MaxSem 14:05, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, as an album list.--Kungfu Adam (talk) 15:03, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, preferably expanding the description. Scienceman123 talk 21:17, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per WP:MUSIC which states that every album from a notable band is considered notable. Tarinth 21:31, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, I see nothing wrong with it, besides the fact that it could be expanded slightly. WP:MUSIC isn't against having all albums of a notable band. Floria L 22:33, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep, notable album by notable band. --Ezeu 00:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment, the album section of WP:MUSIC is being contested. There is a proposed album notability requirement at WP:LP. Lyrl Talk C 00:51, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep The content itself appears to meet WP:N given the prominence of The Temptations. Album article could be Merged into article on the band. --Shirahadasha 02:56, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep. Amazon's review lists this as an "Essential Recording", with an average of 5 stars from user reviews. allmusic.com also has a five-star rating on this album, saying that it "should really be considered the best available summation of their career"... to me this sounds like a notable album worthy of inclusion in the encyclopedia. -/- Warren 04:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per Warren. bbx 05:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep - I am working on the Album project - will bring this up to more-than-stub status soon. This does meet WP:MUSIC#ALBUM. SkierRMH,23:33, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
Comment - marked as stub, album template added to discussion page, which will bring it to the attention of the album project.SkierRMH 23:53, 7 January 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.