Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Motörhead extended discography (2nd nomination)


 * 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. (NAC)   S warm  ( Talk ) 06:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Motörhead extended discography
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Much of the content is redundant of the individual articles. Remaining content could easily be merged into the main article. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:57, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. What makes this any different than the last AFD?   TheWeak Willed   (T * G) 23:52, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Speedy Keep. This looks like a significant piece of information and would overwhelm an already large article on the band. Furthermore, why do articles have to suffer through these needless AfDs?  There should be some protection about obvious situations like this.  It certainly works the other way.  If an editor were to revive an already deleted article, it gets a Speedy Delete.Trackinfo (talk) 04:33, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, until... - I agree that there is a great amount of notable information in this article that would make a merge to the main discography article awkward and bulky (as argued successfully in the first AfD nomination). The nominator has a good point that the problem could be solved if all of the "unofficial" releases had its own album article, so then a simple list could be added (merged) to the main discography article and this extended discography article could be deleted. But only a few of those album have their own articles right now. Until they all have articles, there is too much unique information in this extended discography article to justify deletion. This AfD does have some merits but I consider it premature. D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 16:36, 8 February 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.