Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lovin' Every Minute


 * 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 to Baillie & the Boys. While the notability standards for albums can be considered low, there is still a standard and it does require meeting the basic notability guidelines, namely significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. User:Andy Dingley reiterates that point but I see no actual rationale or evidence for his view which seems to be more about the wording of the listing or conduct of the nominator here. They shouldn't have been listed together but the only argument for The Road That Led Me to You was that it was the final release, which is merely inherited notability from the band itself. No other evidence has been provided. As to Lovin' Every Minute, the copyright and licensing issue aren't as stated 'real coverage' about the album but merely insignificant trivia about the band rather than about the album itself. If User:MadSquirrel wants to create a discography page and thinks it can be justified, then the albums can be redirected there at that point but that doesn't justify keeping them here. - Ricky81682 (talk) 01:29, 5 November 2014 (UTC)

Lovin' Every Minute

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

came out of nowhere to undo my redirection of these two albums several years ago, and seems to be failing to understand how they don't meet WP:NALBUMS. There is literally nothing out there on Google that qualifies as a reliable source -- no reviews, no articles about the album, etc. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 21:55, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * To have 3 albums with their own pages then to delete the pages for last two albums is nonsensical. Either each album has its own page (as currently) or merge all 5 albums onto one page for the group, biography and discography. Common sense needs to be applied here. Squirrel (talk) 21:59, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * "All or none" doesn't always work that way. Notability needs to be asserted too. If we made articles on every recording ever put out by every artist, then there would be tons and tons of unexpandable stubs. Tell me again how these are NOTABLE per our guidelines, not just why you THINK they should have articles. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:33, 20 October 2014 (UTC)


 * keep So your nomination is, "A new editor dared to disagree with me, the Great and Powerful Oz"? Policy suggests there is no-one behind the curtain here. Andy Dingley (talk) 22:36, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Did you even read the part where I said " no sources exist on either album"? Do you really think these pass WP:GNG or WP:NALBUMS? Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 22:47, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Your ability to work Google has frequently failed to meet either WP:BEFORE or WP:COMPETENCE. I don't claim that these albums are remarkable or especially good, but our standards for the inclusion of published albums are always rock-bottom and these appear in the usual places, including Billboard, “On this well-crafted album, the trio remind everyone of the musical magic that occurs when great songs skilled production and a stunning voice unite.” This is not "literally nothing", you have a long track record of deleting everything you see, a longer track record of failing to even try looking for coverage and here you did literally (unlike you, I use the term literally) write a nomination that seems based on disliking an editor, or maybe just any editor with fewer deletions under their belt than you, more than policy about the article. Andy Dingley (talk) 23:08, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
 * "Blah blah blah, I'm voting keep just because I have a grudge against Hammer". How about showing me some of the sources that supposedly exist? If albums have a rock-bottom notability, then why not make an article on the obscure demo that probably got them signed to RCA? Or a tape they probably made in their basement when they were 14? Clearly those are notable, because we allow all albums ever, and if the artist is notable, then their albums are notable bar none. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 00:28, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. I didn't find much real coverage of the album online, just a brief mention here, and a bit about a legal case regarding the artwork. It's possible that there's more coverage around, but at the moment we really only have basic details about the album's release and a tracklisting, which in my view should be coverable within a discography section/article. --Michig (talk) 06:25, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
 * keep That article explains why the album was re-issued with an alternative title, thanks. This is worth including on the page as a reference. Squirrel (talk) 06:20, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:36, 21 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge This entry is covered in Baillie & the Boys and thus is redundant.  --Lfrankblam 17:27, 27 October 2014 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lfrankbalm (talk • contribs)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 02:48, 28 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Merge/Redirect both to Baillie & the Boys. TenPoundHammer is right in saying that there isn't enough significant coverage in reliable sources to justify standalone articles for these albums. Fight it out on the talkpage next time though yeah, this is Articles for deletion after all ;) Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 03:21, 28 October 2014 (UTC)


 * keep - the album Lovin' Every Minute is notable due to the copyright and licencing issues over the artwork, and the subsequent re-issue with a new title and artwork. The second article, The Road That Led Me To You, could be argued as being notable for being the group's final release. As has been pointed out by others, the threshold for "notability" is quite low. Otherwise it could easily be argued that the other 3 albums (which have their own pages) are not notable either. There needs to be consistency applied. I'd support a merge if the proposal was to merge all 5 entries into one discography page, but the proposal is merely to merge the group's last two albums into a page that mentions them only by name and gives no other details. For this reason I vote to keep the articles separate. Squirrel (talk) 05:49, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * We get it, you want the article kept. Now stop saying "keep" over and over again, it won't make any difference. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 18:06, 29 October 2014 (UTC)


 * The article was re-listed, or did you not read the template. Changing my comment on this page to strike-through isn't going to achieve anything, nor is throwing tantrums. Toys back in pram now please. You've asked for notability, that notability has been provided. As per my comment above, the threshold for notability is not high. If no consensus is reached then the article stays. The fact that the discussion was relisted tends to suggest that is the case, and is still the case. If you want to act childish then 4chan is that way. Otherwise, grow up. Squirrel (talk) 07:20, 31 October 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.