Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homegrown (Neil Young 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 04:28, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Homegrown (Neil Young album)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Dubious notability. Only sources are a poorly made reference to Neil Young's biography Shakey, an unreliable fansite and an Allmusic mirror which barely mentions the album. Fails WP:V. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 17:30, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. Never judge a subject's notability solely by the sources cited in a Wikipedia article. Several books on Young cover this in sufficient detail - see Google Books.--Michig (talk) 18:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep As Michig said, it has some coverage. Otherwise a good article with proper citations. DARTH SIDIOUS 2 (Contact) 19:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, speedy close. Widely and contemporaneously reported, well-documented in reliable biographies. The nominatot's practice of initiating deletion discussions on 1960s/70s musical topics without performing even a cursory search of print resources via Google Books is disruptive. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 02:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:53, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy KEEP. The existence of the album has been attested to in hundreds of sources over the past thirty years.  Many of the songs that first appeared on Homegrown appeared on subsequent Neil Young albums and are critically and popularly well-known.  Even the album's cover is widely available.  Qworty (talk) 19:05, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep, speedy close for the reasons stated above. Nominations for deletion should not be made in such haste. -- D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 22:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - This album was also nominated for deletion back in 2008; see this AfD. That old nomination was based on a then-current rule about unreleased albums that I think has been modified in the time since, and in any case one of the results of that old debate was improvements to the article. However, some participants in that debate located additional sources that are not presently in the article. The sources found then and now should be added if anyone has time. -- D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 22:47, 12 October 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.