Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Concept album

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 of the debate was keep (20/1). howcheng [ t • c • w • e ] 17:19, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Concept album

Reason why the page should be deleted The word "concept" can be applied to any invention in history. All music has an underriding concept, even if the concept is to please the audience. The list of concept albums will always be ridiculous. Is Bob Dylan a concept? What about Jimi Hendrix? Or Britney Spears? Don't get me wrong, this article is very cool, but it seems that's what everybody thinks a concept album is, cool. The devision is just far two subjective. I nominate for immediate deletion. -ShadowyCabal

Strong keep on the grounds that it is the first Google hit for "concept album". —BenFrantzDale 21:28, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Disagree. The reason it's the first hit is because Wikipedia has made-up the concept of a concept album. There is no objective way to explain the difference between a concept album and a non-concept album. If so, I'd like to see this list of non-concept albums. -ShadowyCabal 21:28, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Comment: The idea of a concept album exists outside of Wikipedia. Any album that does not have a story running from one song to the next across the entire album is not a concept album. For example, Back in Black by AC/DC is not; it's just a collection of songs. On the other hand Operation: Mindcrime is, as AllMusic says; it tells a story from start to finish. —BenFrantzDale 21:45, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
Comment The first paragraph pretty much explains that a concept album is an album in which the songs are tied together with an overall concept. It also says rightly that there isn't a precise definition. There are a lot of albums that aren't concept albums, because although the artist may have 'conceived' of the album and the individual songs, the songs deal with unrelated concepts. Asking for a list of non-concept albums is like asking for a list of all non-christmas oriented albums. This specific term has been around since at least the 1970's. It's a great article and a real category of music/albums. -Cranialhotfudge 23:01, 8 December 2005 (UTC)
  • This afd nomination was orphaned. Listing now. —Crypticbot (operator) 16:26, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong keep this term has been in use for quite some time, and the article looks to be properly representing the usage of the term. Now the list may be another issue... CarbonCopy 17:07, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as widely-used term with at least 30 years of currency. Just zis  Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 17:11, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep as User:Just zis Guy, you know? The JPS 17:16, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep — Surely you're joking? This term has been in use for musical albums for decades. :) — RJH 17:28, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep. Notable term in use for decades with a lot of historical equity. 23skidoo 17:49, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong keep. This article covers a well-known subject in a familiar way. The only thing it needs is better citations. Nomination seems highly POV. Durova 18:08, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep. 659,000 Google references for concept album [1].

Plenty of Google book entries [2]. 139 Google news references indicate that the term gets plenty of exposure in the general media [3]. 106 Google Scholar results [4]. Capitalistroadster 18:41, 9 December 2005 (UTC)

  • Keep per Guy and others. rodii 18:55, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Have added some references. Could do with some more.Capitalistroadster 19:08, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep. Notable term, well written article, over 7 million 6 hundred thousand Google hits, FCOL. Why was this AfD'd at all? — JIP | Talk 19:35, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep with strength and speed. — FREAK OF NURxTURE (TALK) 19:38, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep notable concept. Hiding talk 22:34, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Emphatic keep - term has been in use since the Pretty Things released the first concept album (S.F. Sorrow) just before Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band. The Kinks made a second career out of concept albums. B.Wind 01:31, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep. Concept albums were commonly known as such decades before Wikipedia was founded. --Metropolitan90 01:50, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong and speedy keep. Smerdis of Tlön 06:00, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep. ShadowyCaballero's claims that Wikipedia invented this term are blatantly false and their claim that the definition is too subjective to be meaningful applies only to their own incorrect definition, not to the one given by the article. In combination with the username "ShadowyCabal", I am strongly tempted to suspect that this is a bad-faith nomination. -- Antaeus Feldspar 18:42, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Speedy Keep. I have to assume there is either some element of bad faith to this nom, or a strange detachment from reality. In both cases, this article has no place on AfD. -- JJay 19:39, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Keep.—thegreentrilby 22:29, 10 December 2005 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep. It goes without saying that every album has some type of underlying theme, even if it is that the songs happen to be on the same album together. This is simply common sense. The idea of a concept album has been widely used since Sgt. Pepper's, and although I think some albums on the list are somewhat of a stretch to qualify as a true concept album, that does not mean that it should be deleted.
  • Strong Keep. I'm trying to avoid an ad hominem attack by finding any reason why the deletion idea has merit. I can't. I can only suggest that "the lunatic is on the grass". :-) Geno Z Heinlein 00:10, 12 December 2005 (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.