Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eponimous


 * 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. Natalie 23:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

When the Dust Settles
Desn't seem notable enough to have a Wikipedia entry by itself. The minimal information it contains could easily be contained in the entry for the actual band. Also, the entry actually appears to have the wrong name - based on the picture of the album the album's title is "epinonimous". Meowy 19:29, 22 October 2007 (UTC) I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

BTW, I had never heard of the band before - and only came across these entries because I had expected the entry "Eponimous" to be a definition of the word "eponimous". Meowy 19:35, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

==Albums== If the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia. Individual articles on albums should include independent coverage. Demos, mixtapes, bootlegs and promo-only records are in general not notable.
 * Just because you haven't heard of the group does not mean that the band or their albums are not notable. I would refer you to Notability (music), in particular:

Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article, space permitting. After careful checking it appears that whilst the group's website refers to the album as Eponimous the album's name is actually Epinonimous so I would suggest that the article be re-titled rather than deleted. It should also be noted that the articles contain more than just the track listing.Dan arndt 00:34, 23 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Note - article now moved to Epinonimous SkierRMH 01:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
 * This AfD nomination was incomplete. It is listed now. DumbBOT 13:27, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Please Dan arndt, stop assuming bad faith. Did I say the album's article should be deleted because I have not heard of it? Of course I didn't. Your own quote explains why the article should be deleted and merged with the article on the band: "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article". Meowy  18:38, 25 October 2007 (UTC)


 * The first album, Epinonimous, has dubious notability, but the other two are on notable labels with separate coverage. The band is notable. Since the group is listed jointly, keep all. --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:10, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * 'Retain' as outlined above whilst details on their debut alum Epinonimous are relatively scarce their subsequent albums are notable & I have provided as much detail as possible at this stage. Dan arndt 23:22, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep all. Seem to meet the WP:MUSIC criteria with independent coverage. &mdash;Moondyne 12:45, 31 October 2007 (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.