Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Wrote And Recorded This In Less Than Five Hours


 * 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. Nominator and all other delete voters changed or withdrew their opinions after the article was improved. (non-admin closure) --erachima formerly tjstrf 13:43, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

I Wrote And Recorded This In Less Than Five Hours

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

seems made up and yahoo search doesn't get anything at all. Me  what do u want?  Your Hancock Please  01:35, 1 April 2008 (UTC) *Really, really weak delete. Withdrawing Vote. Seems like the sources are reliable but still, it still sound hoaxy. I mean - all the names of the albums are all the same except for a number added on the end. It just passes WP:RS but it hasnt been even released yet, how do we know if it is going to be. Fattyjwoods ( Push my button  ) 03:57, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * I change my mind. All three sources are good. so week keep. Me   what do u want?  Your Hancock Please   —Preceding comment was added at 11:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete db-nocontext. JuJube (talk) 01:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Withdrawing vote. Don't feel one way or another, but good job to 10lb.Hammer(man) for improving it ^_^ JuJube (talk) 04:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 *  Speedy Delete db-nocontext and db-vandalism, (it appears to be a hoax) not a very notable album that got a little attention from sources Jons63 (talk) 01:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * No vote one way or other, snowball it. Jons63 (talk) 11:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I'm not sure what cave you all have been living in, but you may want to acquaint yourselves with "the Google". I jest, Skomorokh  02:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 *  Keep Weak keep per sources; seems to be a notable bootleg that got some attention from reliable sources (albeit not very much -- it seems to just scrape through WP:MUSIC). Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 02:26, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Really, really weak keep. As TenPoundHammer says, this only just passes WP:RS, but the bar for inclusion of albums is extremely low, and this meets it. Terraxos (talk) 03:44, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Multiple sources demonstrate notability and verifiability.  Not a crystal issue as it's apparently sure to be released, and has been demonstrated so by the sources. Celarnor Talk to me  03:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Sources demonstrate WP:N and WP:V.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 05:31, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.   --  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined  /  C ) 06:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is incredibly borderline - it just barely meets WP:MUSIC.  Wisdom89  ( T |undefined /  C ) 07:03, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Very weak (almost homeopathic) keep Just about, by the skin of its teeth, mets WP:MUSIC. --Alchemy12 (talk) 11:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep and comment. Regarding all this "very weak", "incredibly weak" keep stuff, we have album articles that are still notable despite having fewer than the three reliable sources of this piece.  tomasz.  16:37, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Meets album notability, barely, but barely is enough. --erachima formerly tjstrf 17:34, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment Well, it's 9-2 keep, so I guess that's consensus. Me   what do u want?  Your Hancock Please   —Preceding comment was added at 23:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
 * If you can convince User:Fattyjwoods of that, you could get a keep by nominator withdrawal and speed up the process. --erachima formerly tjstrf 01:50, 2 April 2008 (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.