Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dub Organiser

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 and redirect to Paul Haig. The consensus was that this lacked sufficient notability for its own page. TerriersFan (talk) 12:03, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Dub Organiser

No assertion of notability for the artist, and thus the album also. asenine ^t/_c\^r (fc: f2abr04) 12:22, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Reply by TORCHOMATIC: I do not agree with you assertion that the Dub Organiser page sould be deleted. The article is suitable AND relevant as it is an important release in the career of Paul Haig. Deletion of this article would make his Wiki articles incomplete, which I believe is not what Wiki would like to do. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Torchomatic (talk • contribs) 12:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, I cannot understand why this Dub Organiser page has been singled out. There are many music pages on Wiki which have less content and less relevance than this one. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.134.213.235 (talk) 16:59, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 23:24, 26 April 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 19:20, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

• Redirect to Paul Haig. --PeaceNT (talk) 14:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
• Redirect to Paul Haig as CD in question has not demonstrated sufficient notability per WP:N and WP:MUSIC. Torchomatic and the IP are reminded that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid "keep" argument (nor is WP:ILIKEIT, for that matter); to comply with WP:N and WP:V, citations from WP:reliable sources demonstrating notability must be included in the article itself, not here. B.Wind (talk) 04:34, 9 May 2008 (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.