Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Area 51 - Concept Album


 * 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. – Will (message me!) 08:42, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Area 51 - Concept Album
I think the author himself summed it up best when JasterMereel (talk • contribs • [ page moves ] • block user • [ block log ]) said on the article's talk page: "I am seriously fuzzy about some of the details of this... This is just what I could glean from the various websites about this album, if anyone actually has it then please correct."

As far as I could work out, Area 51 is a "science fiction" concept album starring Claudia Christian from Babylon 5 that spawned a musical. By seeing as I can't find any information on the actual album apart from the copyright-violating copy/pasted reviews on the article, I think I can safely say it fails WP:MUSIC. If it's not listed on Amazon or Allmusic, how else can anyone be expect to find this album? --  Netsnipe  (Talk)  17:20, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

Just checked about what is "notable" - The author, Daniel O'Brien, was nominated for the Really Useful Group Best Newcomer Awards at the Vivian Ellis Prize 2000. This should qualify for a major music competition - it was a staple of the Musical Theatre industry for many years, and was where the lyricist for Phantom of the Opera was discovered. Many industry profesionals were judges - Cameron Mackintosh, Andrew Lloyd Webber, Don Black etc. The composer / arranger of the show / CD is Iain Cook, of the band Aereogramme, who have been published by Chemikal Underground Records worldwide, a very respected indie Scottish label who also publish Bell & Sebastian and The Delgadoes. So hopefully this won't be deleted, would seem a shame to! We are having a great time in rehearsal and hopefully others can find out about it too through this! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.33.247.248 (talk • contribs).
 * Comment: I think it is a bit unfair that an article should be wiped purely because the product is not on Amazon... the CD was previously available from Dress Circle, FootLight Records in New York, and all Forbidden Planet stoers in England. It was also sold through UFO Magazine, and is currently available through www.musicline-ltd.com (which in fact DOES sell through Amazon.) My society is staging the show and we were pleased to see the artilce. I have alerted the author, who states that, the authors of the original quotes do not mind their feedback being printed. I have asked him to contribute, so maybe that will help too.
 * Delete per nom. Stifle (talk) 19:52, 16 July 2006 (UTC)

If the critera for deletition was that it is no longer available could we also remove most minor bands enire back catalogue? And if the Criterea for deletion is that the article is incomplete can we remove all the stub articles? Could Stifle fill in some of the details please ? --Jaster 08:42, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: I am a little fuzzy on the details since I don't have the album... (but would like it thanks for the hint on how to get it)


 * Comment: I def think this should stay - there seems to be quite a lot of info now, and it can also still be bought... why so keen to delete something? It's a fun show, we certainly like it, it has been staged to very positive feedback and been in a lot of magazines / press. Fingers crossed. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.33.247.248 (talk • contribs).
 * Reply: Then by all means cite them in the article. Establish the album's notability as stated by the Notability (music) and Notability (songs) guidelines. My other problem with that article is that is written like a promotion rather than an impartial article on WHY the album is notable. --  Netsnipe  (Talk)  18:08, 17 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as nn. Also, by the anonhymous comments above, it seems pretty safe the article's appearance is to puff the revival of the 2001 musical, thus, an advertisement.  In most afds, editors are faced with judging notability from evidence here and now.  In this case, we have the hindsight of five years to judge by.  The original musical had a handful of reviews, arguably the most notable being the SF Channel's.  There is nothing since, the album isn't available anywhere that I can find except from the one outlet in the UK.  It's not an official WP policy, but I'm saying the musical disappeared with nary a whimper and nothing to mark its passing in five years.  Tychocat 14:54, 18 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Retain The musical that this CD is of is still in production - see comments above - these are Amateur productions that would be much more likely to want to be able to find something about the musical on Wikipedia, the CD itself seems to not be available but when did this make it worthy of deletion? --Jaster 12:38, 19 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Retain "It's not an official WP policy, but I'm saying the musical disappeared with nary a whimper and nothing to mark its passing in five years" - it's ironic that you are requesting objectivity when you lack it yourself, making an ill informed and unprofessional comment, which you yourself admit is irrelevant in the current context. It is very easy to be snippy - one might suggest that you need to learn  how to spell, for example. The fact of the matter is, the show is out there being produced. We could supply some photos, if you're interested. It is also available for purchase. I really don't see the problem - a dictionary is intended to impart knowledge, why so eager to cut information? It's very easy to hit delete, not so easy to invest a little time into something. There are people out there investing money and staging this work, it has been featured in a lot of media features, what more do you want? There are people who are more than happy to give you the info you seek - photos, details of the show itself, just list them and they will be supplied (some already have been). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 217.33.247.248 (talk • contribs).
 * Comment: Details of your production of a musical have nothing to do with the notability of this album. It'd be more appropriate for a separate article called "Area 51 (musical)" but it's irrelevant here. That's the problem of this article. It doesn't focus on the notability of the album but tries to promote a musical that you're putting on. Note the conflict of interest? --  Netsnipe  (Talk)  17:52, 19 July 2006 (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.