Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Long John's Blues (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 redirect‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__ to Long John Baldry. Daniel (talk) 11:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Long John's Blues (EP)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:NALBUM.

PROD removed with "remove tag Long John Baldry was a very important person in the development of the British blues scene and all his recorded material is significant. It is also an element in the all-too-short British EP world"

But, notability isn't inherited. Must be shown why this EP is notable...especially since all the songs are found on a full length LP and the EP failed to chart. Donald D23  talk to me  12:46, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music,  and United Kingdom.  Donald D23   talk to me  12:46, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 13:13, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep Well you have made an offer that I can't refuse. I learned long ago to stay out of the path of deletionists.  I said my piece, you quoted chapter and verse.  Now we wait for the tie breaker. Carptrash (talk) 19:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Absoutely none of that was policy based. It was WP:ILIKEIT and certainly won't be taken into account by any good admin when it comes time to decide if this stays or goes. Donald D23   talk to me  20:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Long John Baldry: I thought I had found a good source with the numerous mentions in this biography, but it appears those are all about the album of the same name. I couldn't find much else for either, but I imagine whatever else might've looked promising was probably for the album as well and this EP just got nothing. Not surprising for this type of release, or for one which didn't chart at all. And @Carptrash, I'd just like to remind you that AfDs are not about vote counts and there are no tie breakers. It's a matter of Wikipedia policy-based arguments. If you want this article kept, you need to back up your case. If you really did say your piece, at the very least perhaps you could restate that here so it's on the record. Would probably be a lot more helpful than what you have provided. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 20:25, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Baldry was a integral part of the British blues scene that developed in the late 1950s and early 1960s. This EP contains songs written be Willie Dixon, John Lee Hooker, and Jimmy Witherspoon, all important American bluesmen whose songs helped form the backbone of the British blues movement.  The EP was a product of the British EP era that only really lasted until the mid 1960s, making most of them notable.  Packaging album songs on EPs was done in Britain, our EP article states, “In Britain EPs were sometimes used to repackage songs that had previously been issued on albums. The Shadows released EPs The Shadows No. 2 and The Shadows No. 3 both of which included songs found on The Shadows album. The songs from Adam Faith's first album were also released on three EPs, all of which had the same cover as the album, but listed the tracks on the top. The Beatles EP Twist and Shout contained only songs found on their Please Please Me album.”  Oh yes, and I do like it. Carptrash (talk) 16:29, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing the due diligence @ QuietHere, not sure if you are suggesting that the article should be kept or not. I do find it fascinating that The Shadows EPs that I mentioned in my last posting have now been nominated for deletion.  Pretty good chance those are articles started be me as well.  I will likely bow out of all these discussions, having more pressing things to deal with. Carptrash (talk) 20:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 * @Carptrash you need to provide reliable secondary sources which confirm all these things you're claiming, or else it's all unverified original research. As I said above, I couldn't find any, and so I stand by my redirect vote, but if you can find appropriate sourcing, I may change my mind. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 16:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I doubt @QuietHere that I will have any better luck than you. I feel that all these EPs (I think there are 5 up for deletion, some are already gone, 3 days later) are notable but we know how far that gets one here.  I have more pressing issues to deal with, so if my wikipedia legacy ends up with 20 EP articles, (or whatever it ends up being), being deleted, so be it. Carptrash (talk) 16:30, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is (opinion) only made stronger by the inclusion of niche articles that might not appeal to everyone. We have 6 and a half million articles, so they are not all for everyone.  I believe (another opinion) that the British EPs era (ca. 1960 to 1967) is one of those corners and that this article casts a little light there. I also feel that serious editors should leave other serious editors alone.  For those who just must have rules I will toss in Ignore all rules. Carptrash (talk) 19:53, 31 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Redirect. No need to delete. Keep the categories, remove the content and redirect until/unless someone can get sources to substantiate an article. ―Justin ( koa v f ) ❤T☮C☺M☯ 21:34, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I just added the source for much of the article. Carptrash (talk) 21:45, 31 October 2023 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Long John Baldry: Fails GNG, NALBUM. No objection to someone finding or merging sourced content into a new section on the target, sourced content will improve the target; a redirect is all that is needed for the history here.  // Timothy :: talk  02:10, 3 November 2023 (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.