Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Love Lost (Four Freshmen album)


 * 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The result was   Withdrawn Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 21:08, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Love Lost (Four Freshmen album)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested prod; subject is non-notable as per WP:NALBUMS. Article is unreferenced and does not explain significance. Guoguo12 --Talk--  00:06, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- Jclemens-public (talk) 00:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep It's understandable if there's not a lot of sources online for something released more than a half century ago, and the album was likely somewhat of a hit in its time, the Freshmen being at their commercial peak and having won a Grammy the prior year. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  00:13, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * With all due respect, you don't seem so sure when you claim that the subject was "likely somewhat of a hit in its time". Anyway, such a statistic must be proved using "a reliable, published source", as per WP:V. Guoguo12  --Talk--  15:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep The Four Freshmen were as popular a vocal group, especially in jazz, but also among the general listening public, fifty years ago as any vocal group is today. --Alan W (talk) 00:39, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Which is an excellent justification for having an article on The Four Freshmen, but does not in itself justify there being an article on one of their records. 82.153.194.45 (talk) 14:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree. WP:NALBUMS states that "if the musician or ensemble is notable, and if the album in question has been mentioned in multiple reliable sources", then the album can have its own article. However, what of the "mentioned in multiple reliable sources" part? Guoguo12  --Talk--  15:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment: For those interested, pre-AfD discussion occurred at Talk:Love Lost (Four Freshmen album). Guoguo12  --Talk--  15:11, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment - Usually I would be in favor of keeping an article like this, for the reasons in the Keep votes above. However, in this case I don't think anyone can vote with full information because the article does not say if this was a studio album in which the band had full input, or one of those shifty compilations or re-releases without band input, as was fairly common in those times. -- D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 17:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)


 * Fixed I think the objections above are reasonable but not insurmountable. I have fixed the problems with verification of notability and sourcing. Guoguo12, please take a look, and I hope that this discussion can now be closed. --Alan W (talk) 18:21, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for working on the article. Guoguo12  --Talk--  18:37, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Withdrawn by nominator: Problems have been addressed by Alan W. Please close as soon as possible, unless additional discussion warrants otherwise. Thanks. Guoguo12  --Talk--  18:37, 31 December 2010 (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.