Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chasing Shadows (EP)


 * 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 no consensus. Barkeep49 (talk) 01:28, 1 October 2019 (UTC)

Chasing Shadows (EP)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Two passing, WP:ROUTINE mentions. No WP:SIGCOV and I can't find any. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:46, 8 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:46, 8 September 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Redirect to Angels & Airwaves per WP:NALBUM, "articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged into the artist's article or discography" - as there is nothing substantial here to merge, a redirect is appropriate - Epinoia (talk) 17:14, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 11:30, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:59, 16 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of California-related deletion discussions. North America1000 15:59, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 07:23, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Keep - I wonder if the nominator and the previous voter really searched for sources of if they just looked at the present state of the article. The EP made the Billboard charts, a fact that is presently cited in the article, and thus qualifies for WP:NALBUM #2. Professional notice was admittedly scanty but it was covered briefly at LouderSound and a few other places, and received a robust review at Sputnik Music . Thus it has a few reliable sources per WP:NALBUM #1. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 21:50, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Why yes, I did do WP:BEFORE. Billboard did not return any chart results in my search. I'm wondering if you know the difference between a professional and a staff review at Sputnik, but glad to see you know the different between WP:ROUTINE coverage as offered at LouderSound and the sort of coverage required for notability criteria. Now, all that charting really did not result in a lot of coverage so delete the same. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:42, 23 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Footnotes seven through ten in the article go to working pages at Billboard indicating that the record reached the charts there. That satisfies #2 at WP:NALBUM, and that policy also says "a recording may be notable if it meets at least one of these criteria." You have a point about the non-staff review at Sputnik but I intended for that be an example of minor media coverage. Perhaps that is a stretch, but you're the one who missed the Billboard chart placements in that BEFORE search of yours. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (Talk&#124;Contribs) 14:21, 24 September 2019 (UTC)
 * But charting alone simply suggest that they "may be notable if they meet at least one of the following criteria." (see the preamble to WP:MUSICBIO) The charting did not result in any recognition of the work so clearly, it fails any reasonable understanding of what notable is. Redirecting the entry to the band's discography section would maintain all of the charting information and nothing would be lost. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:55, 24 September 2019 (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.