Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Any Port in a Storm


 * 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. (non-admin closure) f  e  minist  17:05, 14 May 2017 (UTC)

Any Port in a Storm

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )


 * Queried speedy delete as "The "does not site any sources" template has been there since July 2011 just under six years. See CSD G6.". But the music album exists and is itself a reference about itself and its contents, surely? Anthony Appleyard (talk) 06:20, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete - which shouldn't come as a surprise, being that I am the one that did the CSD.Kellymoat (talk) 12:25, 30 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Delete. This article does not cite any sources. Unless someone can add content and credible sources, this article should be deleted. Bmbaker88 (talk) 22:05, 2 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:28, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 04:28, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep. Sources added. It charted and there's some coverage, enough such that it meets WP:NALBUM.  Gongshow   talk  19:30, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep Good work, . It meets #2 of NALBUM now at minimum. South Nashua (talk) 20:56, 5 May 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 03:35, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. An obviously invalid speedy tag does not justify deletion. I really don't know why this is at AfD. --Michig (talk) 07:51, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * you should have seen what it looked like a week ago. Oh, wait, you can - click here. Six years with the "this article has no reference" warning box, and little more than a track list. Kellymoat (talk) 10:53, 7 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Neither of which is a valid reason to tag for G6 speedy deletion. --Michig (talk) 11:27, 7 May 2017 (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.