Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lights (EP)


 * 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. j⚛e deckertalk 00:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Lights (EP)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not meet WP:NALBUMS. The notable songs were released from the follow-up album, The Listening. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:28, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep It's the first release of the artist, who is notable. It has four songs that were deemed notable enough to have articles (at least for the moment).   At least two of them charted, one at #18.  I don't see how including the same notable songs on a full length album *later* makes the earlier EP less notable.  If we were having this discussion the day before the album was released, it would be clear that the EP was notable.  The release of the album didn't revoke the EP's notability, since notability can't be removed. --Rob (talk) 06:25, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Did you even read WP:NALBUMS?
 * "An album requires its own notability, and that notability is not inherited and requires independent evidence. That an album is an officially released recording by a notable musician or ensemble is not by itself reason for a standalone article."
 * So your argument that it's the first release of a notable artist is moot.
 * As stated in the nomination, the songs were not released from this EP but from the follow-up album and so they don't confer notability on this album but possibly from the one they were released from, although that doesn't happen either: each article must have its own notability.
 * As for revoking notability: the EP has none. Walter Görlitz (talk) 14:41, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Rob (talk) 06:45, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Rob (talk) 06:49, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect to The Listening (Lights album) — Fails WP:NALBUMS. Not a single citation is present in the article to establish notability. Notability is not inherited from the artist or the singles. STATic message me!   07:14, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect to The Listening (Lights album), as all the songs featured on the EP were included on that album. — Status  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 08:51, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep. I have been editing music on Wikipedia since well before 2006, and local policies have a tendency to shift under the editor's feet, but I would wager, common sense remains the same.  Why would removing this article improve Wikipedia in any way?  It would only obscure the information concerning the two songs on this EP that were not included in the full-fledged album.  Ask yourselves: is slavish adherence to policy, which itself is a moving target, reason enough to remove valuable information that just makes it harder for the user to obtain it? --Mareklug talk 19:26, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * That's not a policy-based argument. This could be redirected to the album and it could very easily be explained that the EP contained... Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:41, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Even if this article is redirected, what's the purpose in deletion? You could redirect now, leaving the content in history, so in future the redirect could be easily undone, and new content and sources could be added.  Mareklug has something of a point.  In the past albums were automatically included for notable artists.  Editors would put content in what are really sub-articles, with this understanding.  Then, some other editors, decided to change the rules, and delete the content, which suddenly had to stand on its own.  Now, I realize that ship has sailed (I'm not arguing guidelines here).  But, if we can't delete this, then we can simply merge/redirect (even though I prefer keeping as stand-alone).  There has not been a single practical argument presented so far for deletion.  --Rob (talk) 20:14, 14 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Current consensus appears to be redirect right now, so history would be kept. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:49, 14 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Agreeing with Mareklug, I suppose Ignore all rules may apply here. We must use WP:Common sense in this debate, and common sense says "keep". --Mr. Guye (talk) 19:55, 26 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Delete and Redirect. There's no "there" there.  — Arthur Rubin  (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per Mareklug ♥ Solarra ♥  ♪ Talk ♪  ߷  ♀ Contribs ♀ 06:53, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, j⚛e deckertalk 16:34, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment This is not a plebiscite on whether WP:NALBUMS is or is not correct. That should be taken-up on the talk page of he guideline. That said, the guideline states that the subject of articles must be notable and notability is defined and the recent keep discussions have not been policy-based. Walter Görlitz (talk) 18:29, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * So, let me ask: would you have deleted this article if we had the discussion immediately before the full length album was released?  Her EP easily met WP:GNG at that time.  But, what you're doing is trying to take away the notability of this EP (shown in sources like this and ascribe them to a later album.  As the article indicates (with sourcing) the songs were altered (albeit in a small way), so the singles weren't just taken from the full album, but were in fact from the EP first.  I see this AFD as an attempt to retroactively remove well established notability.  That's what's against our guidelines.  --Rob (talk) 22:39, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * I actually can't take the notability away from this article. It is either notable or not. When it was nominated, the article did not meet notability criteria. I searched for sources to support its notability and could not find it. Others did as well. What you see is your own ignorance of how AfDs work, not a conspiracy to remove something.
 * The singles were taken from the full album, not the EP. Look at their release schedule. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:37, 28 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. This release does not appear to have a lot of coverage (a brief Allmusic review and a couple paragraphs in the Los Angeles Times were the most in-depth I could find), but it led to the artist winning a 2009 Juno Award ["The award for Lights – who only has an EP to her name (...) was one of the night's few true surprises"]. I expanded the article to include these (and other) write-ups in an attempt to establish the significance of the Lights "era".  Gongshow   talk  21:04, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep – What Gongshow has provided pushes this over the bar of notability, in my view. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 21:40, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep per Gongshow. — Status  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 00:40, 29 May 2014 (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.