Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lush (Mitski 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 keep‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Liz Read! Talk! 23:19, 14 May 2023 (UTC)

Lush (Mitski album)

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

BLARed this a while back but I can see that ruffled some feathers. Finally had another look now and can see that things look just the same as I remember them. Most of the coverage here is career retrospective stuff which touches briefly on this album but doesn't have a huge amount to say, and what is useful could be merged into Mitski without much trouble. I doubt the reliability of Vinyl Me, Please (a blog attached to a digital storefront), and the PodBean-hosted podcast which likely falls under WP:SPS. No appearance of an NMUSIC pass. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 21:49, 30 April 2023 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:35, 7 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Japan,  and New York. QuietHere (talk &#124; contributions) 21:49, 30 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - I think there's just enough in the Nylon magazine & Atwood Magazine sources to justify the existence of this article. Hatman31 (talk) 16:33, 5 May 2023 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep - The article is padded with references to some unreliable blogs and streaming sites, but that stuff can be removed via the editing process. While this album was initially an unknown early release by someone who became notable later, it is still discussed significantly in the reliable sources mentioned by the last voter, and retrospective coverage is still coverage. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 13:48, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - Even though the album doesn't have much coverage due to it not being very impactful upon release, it is still an important part of Mitski, a now very culturally significant artist's, discography as her debut album. Retrospective sources are still reliable sources and this article just needs to be edited to remove unreliable sources and add more information. ilyukika (talk) 23:30, 9 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep - This page meets notability guidelines, as it has received significant coverage from Rolling Stone, Atwood Magazine, and Nylon. Memories of (talk) 00:57, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment There may be a possible canvassing from here: Carpimaps (talk) 11:05, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Edit: I want to make clear that I am not accusing people of being canvassed. I just wished to communicate that canvassed users may vote here. I changed the wording above to communicate this. Carpimaps (talk) 15:43, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I don’t think this is canvassing. Their twitter page is dedicated to updating information relating to Mitski, and the previous deletion of the article garnered quite a lot of attention on their page. They are only continuing to update users on a relevant topic. Everyone who has voted so far has established editing histories so I doubt this is much of an issue. ilyukika (talk) 11:25, 10 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I suppose it is now necessary to declare that I voted to "Keep" based on policy. I'm not a Mitski fan (though I am familiar with her) and I don't even use Twitter. The allegation above requires some evidence that the voters here are also active at that Twitter page, and that they voted while disregarding WP policy. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 14:34, 10 May 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.