Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/"C" Is for (Please Insert Sophomoric Genitalia Reference HERE)


 * 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   delete. JForget 00:14, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

"C" Is for (Please Insert Sophomoric Genitalia Reference HERE)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

An unreleased EP with no reliable sources and very few ghits. Fails the notability criteria at WP:NALBUMS and WP:GNG. A previous prod and redirect were reverted. JD554 (talk) 09:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  —JD554 (talk) 09:37, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into the section in Puscifer . Wacko Jack O   13:12, 14 October 2009 (UTC) Delete - Already has it's own section in the Puscifer article. Doesn't seem notable enough to warrant entire article.  Wacko  Jack O   13:24, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:CRYSTAL, and not even complete enough to start an article on. --  Blanchardb - Me•MyEars•MyMouth - timed 16:35, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete as Wikipedia isn't a crystal ball: there's no references that discuss the subject, hence no need for an article B figura  (talk) 17:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete and Redirect: to Puscifer. Joe Chill (talk) 22:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)


 * People, it's about the same amount of info as for "D" Is For Dubby - The Lustmord Dub Mixes article, and no one said a word when I first created that page. It's a new EP, it needs a page. In addition, there is now a confirmed track listing and release date, plus references. Please relax and just leave it, for the love of christ. Ryan-S79 (talk) 11:52, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * This discussion isn't about "D" Is For Dubby, that is a WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument. You haven't said how "C" is for ... meets the notability criteria at WP:NALBUMS or WP:GNG. --JD554 (talk) 17:13, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Um, it's an upcoming EP release. There is also an article for Puscifer's first EP. It has a confirmed release date. It has a track listing. It has cover art. What more does it need, a pot of gold at the end? Ryan-S79 (talk) 23:51, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Have you read any of the links I've provided? WP:NALBUMS states "All articles on albums, singles or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines, with significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." WP:GNG states "If a topic has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed to satisfy the inclusion criteria for a stand-alone article." Just because it's going to be released doesn't mean it is notable. --JD554 (talk) 06:56, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Guess what? All previous Puscifer releases came directly from Maynard's Puscifer website, with no independent sources, and no other pages have had any contention like this. Go, merge, delete, whatever the fuck you want. It will be up again in less than a month. Jesus fuckin' Christ. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ryan-S79  (talk • contribs)  10:56, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Yowser. I suggest you take a breather on this matter, and take a read of WP:CIVIL too. I have gone through the article on Puscifer's releases and tagged for notability/refs where necessary. Cheers for the heads up on that. Rehevkor ✉  14:42, 18 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Notability not established - unlikely to ever pass NALBUMS regardless. Rehevkor ✉  14:44, 18 October 2009 (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.