Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Have You Got It Yet?


 * 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. —Quarl (talk) 2007-04-28 07:45Z

Have You Got It Yet?

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

This is more of a procedral nomination than anything, it was originally prod'd, but I think it would be better to get a greater consensus before deleting. In my opinion, it is a non notable album failing WP:MUSIC  Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  14:01, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - I prodded this originally... anyway, I still think it should be deleted. It's not notable. I mean, it's not even a primary bootleg, it's a COLLECTION of bootlegs (like a bootleg of bootlegs). There aren't any acceptable independent sources and only 11,000 google hits (only three or four of those are about the subject of this article). The Parsnip! 14:09, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete WP:ILIKEIT, but there's a lack of reliable sources and this compilation is almost certainly not notable. I think this could have been left to go through prod, but respect the fact that anybody can challenge a prod. --kingboyk 14:11, 24 April 2007 (UTC) (e/c)
 * Seems to be an obvious Delete, this is a compiliation CD put together by members of a Yahoo Group (a message board, more or less), making it about as non-notable as one can possibly imagine. Fails WP:V. --Xyzzyplugh 14:14, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - There does seam to be reliable sources;, and a g-search provides numerous semi reliable sources   Ry an P os tl et hw ai te  14:16, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Huh? Neither of the sources you mentioned say anything about this collection of bootleg CDs.  One of the articles contains the phrase "have you got it yet", but it is not a reference to this at all.  --Xyzzyplugh 14:22, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete (this is irritating, I got throught after fourth edit conflict), I am not sure if WP:MUSIC applies to this or not. But I do not see it satifying the notability criterion. Hardly anyone keeps a track of its popularity among the fans (with definitive statistics), so its kinda hard to judge notability. Looking at Last.fm, I see only hundred odd listeners, which kinda seems low. From Ghits, I do not see much activity around it (only a handful of forums mention it). Applying the "attributible to reliable sources" policy, it looks even more bleak, as I did not see any such source which mentions it (the set of recordings). --  soum  (0_o) 14:24, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as not notable (per Wikipedia standards; I might try to find a copy of this myself as it sounds interesting to a Pink Floyd fan). --ElKevbo 17:17, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, as far as the bootleg. Not really notable.  As for the legend behind the name (Barrett would play a tune and spontaneously change it when the rest of them had it)...well, I saw it discussed in an interview once, but that's about it. -- Dennis The Tiger   (Rawr and stuff) 19:31, 24 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - The consensus here seems pretty clear. The Parsnip! 13:42, 27 April 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.