Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Horror Stories (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. any merge suggestion can be discussed in the talk page of the article JForget  02:22, 14 February 2010 (UTC)

Horror Stories (album)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Fails WP:NALBUMS. No evidence that it ever charted at Allmusic or Billboard. No evidence of significant coverage by reliable sources. Tagged as an orphan. Article cites no sources. Niteshift36 (talk) 07:57, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The Dwarves are notable, and so is the album per WP:NALBUMS: "In general, if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia." Reviews, etc here.  Lugnuts  (talk) 09:51, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The key word is "may". Look at the rest of NALBUMS: "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article, space permitting.". The article is a single sentence and a track listing. Niteshift36 (talk) 09:53, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. Debut album by clearly notable band - references added. Merging into the band article wouldn't make sense.--Michig (talk) 13:33, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:54, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Leaving an album that has no significant coverage is what doesn't make sense. Niteshift36 (talk) 19:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep - nonconstructive nitpicking over meaning of the term "Significant." I repeat my vote and comment from this discussion. D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 19:55, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * And your repeated characterization of it as nitpicking doesn't change the fact that the criteria uses the word significant for a reason. If you don't like it, get it changed. Until then, just complaining about it being applied isn't constructive either. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:14, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Another thing that isn't constructive is resorting to a shot on my user page when what we're debating is the merit of individual album articles (or in this case, many albums by the same band). My votes are not changing, and I've described why. D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 20:22, 7 February 2010 (UTC)
 * A shot? You cut and pasted the same accusation of bad faith over numerous AfD's. I took my comments about the lack of good faith to your talk page rather than here. How is that less constructive? Niteshift36 (talk) 20:32, 7 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. Significant coverage in multiple sources; satisfies WP:NALBUMS.  Gongshow  Talk 06:20, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Merge or Redirect to Dwarves (band). Although I have disagreed with the nominator about the significance of the allmusic coverage of Dwarves albums, I agree in this case, since the allmusic review is more about the band with only a pssing reference to the album in question.  The other sources listed in the article do not appear to provide very significant coverage either, saying little more than that this was the band's 1st album. Rlendog (talk) 20:20, 8 February 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.