Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/20th Century Masters-The Millennium Collection: The Best of Grace Jones


 * 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   no consensus. no obvious merge target has emerged so no-consensus but I would say that amerge appears to be a significant stand of opinion here Spartaz Humbug! 03:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Clarification. I closed this as no-consensus because it would have been stupid to close it as merge somewhere but not sure where. Since a merge is an editorial decision, it does not require a consensus in a deletion decision before it happens. Spartaz Humbug! 07:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

20th Century Masters-The Millennium Collection: The Best of Grace Jones

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Mid-price compilation. Has failed to appear on any notable music chart. Lack of significant coverage by reliable sources. I've also listed those related articles for the same reason:

Kekkomereq4 (talk) 19:18, 12 November 2009 (UTC) Note: All of the "related" articles each had their own AfD opened when I believe it was the nominator's intent to bundle them into one. I have closed all of them and copied any delete !votes below: KuyaBriBri Talk 19:54, 13 November 2009 (UTC) MERGE into the Grace jones article or into the 20th century masters article.--99.182.21.35 (talk) 02:44, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: These really must be split up. They refer to different artists, some of Russo's are singles, not "mid price comps," etc.  Russo's singles, for example, may have hit it big at some point.  I'm finishing up so I haven't the energy at the moment to look into them all in detail, but the least you should do is split the Russo from the Jones. - BalthCat (talk) 08:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note that the nominator split the Russo songs/albums into a different AfD, Articles for deletion/Notte senza luna, and left the Jones albums here. KuyaBriBri Talk 19:30, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Today I am commenting on the PROD's for the various Grace Jones compilations. I can see the inspiration for proposing the deletion of some or all of these nearly-identical compilations, but I'm not convinced of non-notability for all of those proposed for deletion by Kekkomereq4. Despite the ridiculous record company duplication, this one is a possibly notable standalone release. It's just distinct enough to merit its own mention. Notable artist, major label release, though the article certainly needs sources. Doomsdayer520 (talk) 14:35, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Island Life 2:
 * Delete/Merge: The information in this PROD page should be made into a special section of the article for the original Island Life. In fact, a listing of the four bonus tracks is already there. Doomsdayer520 (talk) 14:06, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Colour Collection:
 * Delete/Merge: Since this was the second compilation with the identical track listing, a mention of this 2006 release could be added to the article for The Universal Masters Collection (Grace Jones album). Doomsdayer520 (talk) 14:21, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MuZemike 20:04, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  — J04n(talk page) 20:08, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge multiple reissues of one album into one article, Keep the rest. Major-label releases by a notable artist tend to be notable in almost all cases. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  21:50, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete the headline article, as there is no article on the compilation series to merge to. It has insufficient notability, even though a major artiste and major label, as it is yet another compilation collection, with little impact likely due to the large number of previous times the same material has been released in previous collections. I hope the other articles mentioned are being considered on their own merits. It's disheartening to think that WKP editors have to go through this process for every repackaging of a compilation CD. Centrepull (talk) 06:47, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Userfy, and allow Merge DO NOT KEEP By saying "merge" I mean it is acceptable for the content to exist somewhere else, not as an excuse for the content to sit around on Wikipedia for all time while nobody actually performs the merge. Miami33139 (talk) 01:31, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Split the nom - some of these might be notable, some are not. Bearian (talk) 23:30, 22 November 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.