Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Tree Full of Secrets (2nd nomination)


 * 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. W.marsh 17:11, 11 June 2007 (UTC)

A Tree Full of Secrets

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Subject of this article is an unverifiable and unnotable collection of bootleg recordings (i.e.: not released by the band) and the whole article is basically OR. Fails WP:MUSIC. The band that recorded them is notable, the songs themselves are perhaps notable, but a random bootleg collection of these songs is NOT notable and impossible to verify. All of the songs are available on a wide array of other bootlegs. Please discuss notability of the subject, not the individual songs as they are irrelevant to establishing whether this bootleg collection is verifiable and notable. The Parsnip! 16:56, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Keep I've heard of it and seen it used as a source in numerous articles about Syd Barrett, Bob Klose, etc. 18,700 GHits. Notable collection. - Richfife 20:16, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment You may have heard of it, but can you provide non-trivial independent sources? Simply saying you've heard of it is WP:OR. It's not even made up of CDs but CD-Roms. Not trying to take a tone here, just trying to make a point. The Parsnip! 02:49, 31 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Not because it's a bootleg, but because it's a CD-R (with .nfo files, it sounds more like a torrent). And because the article is little more than a track listing. Closenplay 19:36, 1 June 2007 (UTC)


 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Krakatoa  Katie  23:44, 5 June 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete and here's why: Even if the bootleg were notable (i.e., if it deserved a mention on pages related to the band), this particular article merely replicates wholesale a very long track-list that is of no interest beyond the Pink Floyd collectors community. What's more, it's already available elsewhere; reproducing it on Wikipedia only draws on unverified original research. Get rid of it! BotleySmith 13:18, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 19:45, 7 June 2007 (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.