Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hand Over Fist


 * 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. Non-notable as per WP:MUSIC ( talk→  BWilkins   ←track ) 12:23, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Hand Over Fist

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Demos are assumed non-notable per WP:MUSIC. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 23:51, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 14:28, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. Non notable without significant coverage of which I can find none. Rehevkor ✉  17:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete. NN. I am not sure of the significance between "demo" and "for sale" - a demo or to give it its full spelling "demonstration" is a recording for showing what the song/artist is capable of. Once it is for sale then it can't really be a demo, but an official recording. All by the way, as notability is not established. --Richhoncho (talk) 12:28, 22 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Comment - Please define the word "demo" and place this album in that context. Just because an article brands something a demo does not make it so.  The claim needs to be cited and there are no references in this article.  Futhermore, a demo once released is no longer a demo but a release, QED, as pointed above by, though the master copy remains a demo.  I can't !vote on whether this article should be kept, though, as I have no idea how notable its subject is, there being no references as I pointed out  --Jubilee♫ clipman  01:57, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Response There is no Wikipedia: namespace definition of a demo, but there is Demo (music) and the simple fact that this article explicitly states that this is a demo several times. A demo does not cease to be a demo once money is exchanged. Cf. Nebraska (album) or Magnapop (album), which are demo albums that someone can buy with cash money. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:40, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Nebraska proves the point well, whether or not my rationale is correct: your blunt statement that "Demos are assumed non-notable" is the issue here, as I pointed out in another debate. Now that you have contextualised that statement by stating that we need to prove WP:SIGCOV, then I concur.  Springsteen's album consisting entirely of demos (therefore a "demo album" according to Demo (music)) is 100% notable, this album probably is not notable.  Hence, I will now vote  --Jubilee♫ clipman  05:11, 25 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete - Fails WP:V and WP:SIGCOV --Jubilee♫ clipman 05:11, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - to correct a misinterpretation/assumption in the nomination. The guideline WP:MUSIC says that demos are general not notable; however, they may be notable if they have significant independent coverage in reliable sources. Regards, SunCreator (talk) 00:08, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Indeed. That's a point the nom is fully aware of now after recent discussion elsewhere  --Jubilee♫ clipman  01:24, 26 April 2010 (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.