Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love, Lies & Therapy


 * 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 Saliva discography. I think this is the target article that is the best fit but if you disagree you can discuss it on the redirect talk page. Liz Read! Talk! 03:48, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Love, Lies & Therapy

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

Found reviews from AllMusic and Classic Rock Italia which give me enough reason to not immediately BLAR, but not enough to be confident in notability. There are a few other publications that covered the release, but it didn't look like they were writing anything unique. I would redirect to Saliva (band). QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 23:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 23:20, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * if more sources can be added, and additional information can be added, such as a "Critical reception" section, prove the album is WP:N worthy. —Mjks28 (talk) 23:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC)
 * That's a WP:SOURCESMAYEXIST argument. You have to find and provide the sources first, before voting to keep. Richard3120 (talk) 14:51, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I'm not entirely clear what you're saying here Mjks28 but it does read that way. If you're saying that the article is keepable based on the sources I included in my nomination then please specify that, but otherwise I'm not sure of what use this comment is. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 17:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * I was trying to say that the article could be improved rather than deleted by adding more information and finding new sources. However, I have tried to find sources of notability, and other than a news article promoting the album's release, I couldn't find any evidence that the album is notable, so I now agree with redirect. Mjks28 (talk) 22:06, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Mjks28 next time, please do your searching before you vote. Voting to keep based on the unconfirmed possibility of sources existing should be discouraged. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 23:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla  Ohhhhhh, no! 00:33, 1 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: Fails to satisfy Notability (music). Not finding significant and independent coverage in reliable sources. The album was released on June 10, 2016, and the article created June 14th. Because the article list the names of living people the criteria is far above "one source". -- Otr500 (talk) 15:30, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * @Otr500 are you opposed to redirecting to Saliva (band) as I put in my nomination? QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 17:10, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Reply to : I would not be opposed, as a ATD, to a redirect. -- Otr500 (talk) 22:57, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, good to know. Just figured I should ask since you specifically voted for deletion. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 23:05, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Redirect to Saliva discography. There does not appear to be significant coverage in third-party, reliable sources, but since this is a viable search term that readers may use, a redirect would be preferable in my opinion over out-right deletion. I think a redirect to the discography list would be better than a redirect to the main band article. Aoba47 (talk) 19:20, 1 July 2024 (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.