Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ad Majorem Satanae Gloriam


 * 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. Shi meru  06:29, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Ad Majorem Satanae Gloriam

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Demos are assumed non-notable per WP:MUSIC and Google shows no substantial third-party coverage. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:59, 3 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:32, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems to me that you are finding demo's, and nominating them for the sole purpose of them being a demo album. Remember, Music guidelines do not state anything about demo's being inherently non-notable. It also seems to me that you are going through all of my personally created articles, as all the notices on my talk page seem to be on the same day, around the same time. Try to broaden your search out a bit when searching for AfD candidates. And it would also be better if you do a better Google search, other than just searching for the album name, minus any details such as the band name. (Especially as this album shares the same name as a well known Gorgoroth album.) Undead Warrior (talk) 17:33, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Undead Warrior, rest assured that it's not just you. Unlike the scorched-earth style of the nominator, many other people around here are much more willing to work with the word "assumed" in the WP guideline on demos, which in my book calls for flexibility whenever merited. See many of the discussions at list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. I couldn't agree more with your assessment of what the nominator is doing. -- D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 18:28, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Response Google shows nothing substantial about this demo. You are mistaken that I am singling out your contributions, as I have nominated hundreds of album articles for deletion, including several that are currently nominated which you did not create. Album articles need to follow notability guidelines just like everything else and virtually all of the articles on demos were unsourced and there were no sources readily available to show that they were notable. The same is true for this one. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:47, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:12, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete - could not find significant, reliable source coverage of this demo to establish notability.--70.80.234.196 (talk) 02:13, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete no real coverage. . LibStar (talk) 03:42, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Nothing about the outcome here, but I am not 100 percent on the whole IP's voting in AfD. It does not sit right with me. (Think about it, a user logging out and re-voting...I have seen it happen before) Also, LibStar, keep in mind that a source, especially in regards to the metal music area, will not always show up in a simple Google News search. In fact, Google News really isn't that good of a search engine to search for musical works. Undead Warrior (talk) 05:36, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
 * provide reliable sources then. LibStar (talk) 06:08, 10 June 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.