Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Myths & Legends of Kamelot


 * 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   delete. Cirt (talk) 13:42, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Myths & Legends of Kamelot
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This is a page based off a bootleg album and therefore, does not meet the guidelines-- F-22 Raptor IV 21:17, 31 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. While I see no reason why a bootleg cannot be notable, I also see no evidence that this one is.  Yes, it's available for download from a hundred or so torrent sites.  There are a few bloggers talking about it. Neither of these things suggest notability. JulesH (talk) 21:20, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep While most mentions are in blogspots, there are multiple mentions elsewhere. Here, here, here, and here. Also, the first links claims to it having been released on SPV. Undead Warrior (talk) 23:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The first, second and fourth are user-contributed sources, which are explicitly disallowed by WP:V. While I can't read Russian, the third appears to be a bittorrent download source, which is clearly not a reliable source. JulesH (talk) 21:13, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. No significant coverage found. Band is notable. Is this really a bootleg? - appears to be on the band's (former?) label. Allmusic doesn't list it.--Michig (talk) 20:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * My guess is that some of the non-reliable sources don't realise it's a bootleg, so list it as released by the band's label at the time of release. The fact that reliable sources don't know about seems to confirm this; if it was an official release, they would. JulesH (talk) 08:08, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: no significant 3rd party notability WP:NALBUMS. JamesBurns (talk) 04:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete nn, no significant coverage in reliable 3rd party sources. Carlossuarez46 (talk) 03:23, 5 February 2009 (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.