Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ao Vivo no Mosh


 * 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. Nomination withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Mhhossein (talk) 14:18, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Ao Vivo no Mosh

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Recreation of an article deleted via PROD. Subject appears to fail GNG and NALBUM. Perhaps there are sources in Portuguese somewhere? If anyone finds enough to establish notability I will happily withdraw the nom. Ad Orientem (talk) 13:48, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Withdrawing Nomination based on significantly improved sourcing which satisfies WP:V and W:GNG. Suggest this AfD be closed as uncontested Keep.Ad Orientem (talk) 14:42, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Everymorning (talk) 14:06, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 16:08, 14 April 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * I've added references and a reception section. It appears to be considered an undergound classic and there is enough coverage to keep. Cheers. Neodop (talk) 20:50, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:15, 22 April 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep perhaps as this seems enough. SwisterTwister   talk  05:52, 28 April 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:01, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep The new sources provide enough coverage for this to warrant its own article. Aoba47 (talk) 20:44, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as its very good to see a reception section with details of reviews appropriately sourced so WP:GNG is passed. Atlantic306 (talk) 22:41, 3 May 2016 (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.