Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dominion (Benedictum 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 KEEP. postdlf (talk) 02:33, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Dominion (Benedictum album)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested Prod with "Universal praise". Udder rubbish. No sources. Phearson (talk) 03:47, 12 March 2011 (UTC)


 * KEEP: Phearson proposed rapid deletion on the same day the page was created with more information on it than pages that currently exist. So far he has made no attempts to fix any problems with the album page or the page for the band and has only tried to delete this and all pages. I am beginning to suspect s/he has something of an agenda with regards to this band. As the "Universal praise" comment was in the revision history and not on the main page, his attempt at a joking (and possibly sexist) dismissal of an off-hand comment as a means of denying the validity of the reversion seems offensive. I apologize for the tone of this comment, but since s/he was attacking my comment in a dismissive manner, it became imperative to point out the deficiencies in his/her reasoning and general reliability. Blackfyr (talk) 07:40, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Phearson's prod sated "No indication of Notability, WP:N." Blackfyr removed the prod and stated, "There have been multiple reviews of this album with universal praise." The Prod itself was rubbish because it was not clear. Blackfyr's response to the Prod stated that there have been multiple reviews. That is true and fully responsive to the Prod. WP:N is about "Wikipedia covers notable topics—those that have been "noticed" to a significant degree by independent sources." Sources do not need to be in the article to meet WP:N - there only need be a liklihood that they exist. Apparently feeling hurt, the AfD nominator chopped Blackfyr's statement out of context to give a false impression. The AfD nominator also said No Sources. That is false. Phearson has been with Wikipedia since 16 June 2009 and should know how to write a Prod to avoid WP:BITE and to not emotionally react when someone contests a Prod posted by Phearson. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:11, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:21, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
 * My concern was the reasoning of the edit summery of when the prod was removed. "Universal Praise" sounded like a WP:Peacock term ans did not specify what was done to resolve the issue for the removal of the Prod. The situation has long since been cleared up. I also must ask you to refrain from personal attacks, I do not edit Wikipedia based on how I feel, and that itself has no bearing on the deletion discussion. Phearson (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2011 (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.