Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Return To Pepperland


 * 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 d e lete. east. 718 at 19:32, 11/4/2007

Return To Pepperland

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Contested PROD. Unsourced and unverified. Not mentioned at Paul McCartney's own page, nor at Paul McCartney discography. If it is unreleased, why does it get an article? Seems a bit hoaxy to me. TexasAndroid 13:21, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * A Google search shows that there is indeed a bootleg by this name bouncing around. Still, this is unsourced, and there's no assertion nor sourcing on why this particular bootleg is actually notable.  So not a hoax, but still, doesn't seem to be WP material IMHO.  - TexasAndroid 13:25, 29 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete If this were an actual completed album that was intended to be commercially released but wasn't due to some controversy or dispute, I could see a possible article there. Instead it's apparently just a bootleg of demos and other miscelleny and devoid of reliable sources in any case. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  14:11, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

People don't be dumb. If you think some information is missing, find it and add. Deletion is not a good thing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ShindlerR (talk • contribs) 14:34, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * It's the responsibility of those who want the article to stay to provide the proper sourcing, not of those who enforce the project's policies. And being insulting of those whom you are trying to convince is generally not a productive way to go about persuading people. - TexasAndroid 14:39, 31 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge. IMO Anything by P Mc is notable.  Tiptopper 00:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * So if I assembled 1,000 different bootleg tapes of random selections of his stuff, every single one would be notable? The issue is not whether things actually done by him are notable, but whether a bootleg of his stuff, from totally unknown origin, is notable. - TexasAndroid 12:41, 2 November 2007 (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.