Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Massachusetts (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   Speedy deleted. By as G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban (non-admin closure)  &#124;  Uncle Milty  &#124;  talk  &#124;  02:12, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Massachusetts (album)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Non-notable album, any information could easily be contained in discograpy. (Redirect reverted by article creator). This is little more than fancruft. TheLongTone (talk) 10:42, 25 January 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - non-notable records of artists with articles are not subject to speedy deletion. Sam navera (talk) 6:51, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * This is an articles for deletion discussion, not a speedy deletion nomination. Note that the article creator describes the record as non-notable.TheLongTone (talk) 11:13, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  Jinkinson   talk to me  16:08, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Brazil-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:34, 27 January 2014 (UTC)

Weak keep. I would normally support merging such a page to the band's discography, but the article does have enough information and references to justify a separated page. It could benefit from better sourcing, though. The ones we have for now are mostly self-published or mere brief mentions. Victão Lopes Fala! 19:55, 27 January 2014 (UTC) 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 01:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)


 * Article has been deleted, G5: Creation by a blocked or banned user in violation of block or ban.TheLongTone (talk) 23:46, 3 February 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.