Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nirvana's In Utero DVD


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 01:25, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Nirvana's In Utero DVD
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Non-notable DVD, not even asserted to exist —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 02:56, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - certainly exists (see here) and given Nirvana's pop culture impact it's probably notable. I'll give the article a tidy, see if I can't save it maybe. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:07, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - I've reworked the article now with notable reviews, it should be much better. After the AfD closes, if the result is keep the article will need a name change to reflect the correct DVD title.  I would also support a merge to In Utero but I suspect there's enough critical analysis out there for this DVD to keep a stand-alone page. - DustFormsWords (talk) 03:22, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  — J04n(talk page) 12:31, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep per article rescue by DustFormsWords and the cultural significance of Nirvana.Shawn in Montreal (talk) 21:08, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Notability established with coverage here and here. The nom and closing admin should take note of the improvement made in the article since its nomination.  Also, as noted above it should be renamed; In Utero: Under Review is how it is listed at Allmusic. J04n(talk page) 23:37, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
 * The DVD cover actually says "Nirvana - A Classic Album Under Review - In Utero" and then another subtitle under In Utero that I can't read on the low res image, which is different from the Allmusic name, which is different again from the names used in the other reviews. So I guess there's some confusion as to its name; the best path (I think) would be to use the text on the DVD cover and then set up redirects for the other names. - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:40, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Keep - per J04n and use the naming convention per DustFormsWords. Rlendog (talk) 22:00, 7 November 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.