Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/$O$


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 03:12, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

$O$

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

No sources, no evidence of notability and even the band Die Antwoord have notability issues. There's no evidence that even the band is notable. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  21:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - Does not appear to meet WP:NALBUMS. Likely also candidate for speedy deletion under A9.  R mosler  | ●   22:20, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: A9 is intended to be used in the case where 'An article about a musical recording that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant and where the artist's article does not exist.' (WP:CSD, emphasis mine) or 'If the artist associated with the work does not have an article, or if the artist's article has already been deleted, an article about a musical recording that does not indicate why its subject is important or significant is eligible for speedy deletion under criterion A9.' (WP:NALBUMS, again emphasis added by me). Definitely not the case here. --Kaini (talk) 18:19, 22 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:40, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete as article fails notability criteria for albums. Armbrust  Talk  Contribs  13:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep - this band has had a huge amount of coverage in Pitchfork Media and other fashionable places (BoingBoing was another site instrumental to them blowing up) - see pitchfork:   etc and boingboing    etc. frankly mystified by the AfD on this and the related EP, as this is a band signed to Interscope Records, not a small indie label --Kaini (talk) 23:58, 16 September 2010 (UTC)
 * If notability exists, expand the article and I will gladly review and retract my nomination. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  00:02, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * not a problem - added an initial boingboing reference, and shall assert notability further in the next day or so. --Kaini (talk) 00:11, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * also, some MetaCritic info, and the album cover --Kaini (talk) 01:04, 17 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep for the same reasons listed by Kaini. -zorblek (talk) 09:55, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment, Billboard talks about a 17-track version being streamed and a 23-track version being released. There's no source for the singles and so the question of significant coverage still arises. e.g. where is A worldwide release in physical format is planned. sourced from? considering that the introduction serves as the body of the article, everything needs a source. --  Lil_℧niquℇ №1 &#124;  talk2me  00:33, 19 September 2010 (UTC)
 * The tracklisting thing had me a little confused as well until i saw this pitchfork article:
 * "The Cherrytree/Interscope $0$ is a reworked version of the same album that was originally available on Die Antwoord's website earlier this year. Check out the tracklist below." --Kaini (talk) 01:37, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep - see Kaini--Narayan (talk) 13:15, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I have no opinion on whether or not the album deserves a page of it's own, however, the underlying reason for the AfD request "No sources, no evidence of notability and even the band Die Antwoord have notability issues. There's no evidence that even the band is notable" is completely false, and hence the logic for the deletion request is nonexistent. 1) The page has sources (I don't know if they were added before or fter the AfD request.) 2) I personally don't know if I would say the album itself is notable (do all albums and songs of a notable band need to be notable to have pages about them?) but it contains a notable song - enter the ninja which was/is an internet viral phenomena. 3) What notability 'issues'?  4) No evidence that the band is notable? Clearly the requester has not bothered to even read the band's page. Centerone (talk) 23:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Thank you for what I can only call an injection of sanity into the discussion, Centerone :) - the Die Antwoord article was quite well sourced before the AfD, and the $O$ article was pretty much your standard infobox + tracklisting deal. The fact that the article is better now as a result of the AfD is a good thing, undoubtedly, but I share the opinion that the AfD itself really shouldn't have been raised - and the same applies to the other Die Antwoord AfD in progress at present. (addendum) I notice that a page was created today for Enter the Ninja (song). I do feel that this probably won't make an article, but would probably make an excellent section here. --Kaini (talk) 00:13, 23 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep per Kaini. And, as an aside: Die Antwoord not notable? Seriously?--Arxiloxos (talk) 05:43, 23 September 2010 (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.