Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kulanjan


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:30, 11 March 2009 (UTC)

Kulanjan

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

Per the removed PROD tag. ╟─ Treasury Tag ► contribs ─╢ 17:08, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - A quick google reveals the following sources  among others (which I can't access without a subscription). Definitely notable. Also can I ask that the nominator please include better reasoning in AfD pages? A link to a PROD diff is not helpful.  Jenuk1985  |  Talk  21:24, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep. Very notable album by two highly notable musicians. No rationale for deletion provided. No evidence of an attempt to find sources to demonstrate notability before nominating. Allmusic and Rolling Stone reviews were easily found and have been added, along with additional sources.--Michig (talk) 08:48, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't want to delete, as you'll have read in my nom. I simply tagged to say that sources were needed, but the article's creator removed them and was unwilling to co-operate, so I reluctantly came down this route. As I said above. ╟─ Treasury Tag ► contribs ─╢ 08:52, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * That's still not a reason for deletion. If you didn't want to delete this article, why on earth did you bring it here? If anyone removes perfectly valid tags indicating references required etc., simply re-add them, and if they keep getting removed, get an admin involved.--Michig (talk) 08:59, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Because I thought that this would be more harmless than getting into a revert-war. The article has now been improved, and the community consensus will make a better decision than I could alone. I'm really sorry if you think that I've wasted your time, though. ╟─ Treasury Tag ► contribs ─╢ 09:03, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * This is not "harmless". AFD has a lot of articles to wade through without wasting people's time on articles that don't need deletion.  If you have a dispute with another editr, don't bring it here.  Look to Dispute resolution. -- Whpq (talk) 15:38, 8 March 2009 (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.