Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sacred City


 * 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. Tone 14:16, 21 September 2018 (UTC)

Sacred City

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NALBUM. Produced by non-notable artists. Merger theoretically possible, but in practice not as there is not enough content to make a merger beneficial. Kirbanzo (talk) 21:37, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:57, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:57, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions.  CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 22:58, 31 August 2018 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 04:08, 7 September 2018 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —AE  ( talk  •  contributions ) 15:29, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Comment: I disagree with the nominator's statement that the band were "non-notable artists" – Shriekback were a well known group on the UK's alternative music scene throughout the 1980s, and even dented the UK charts on occasion, and the band's two principal members were separately involved in two other very notable groups with UK chart hits. I've tidied the article up and will admit that the one-and-a-half reviews currently present don't make a convincing case for keeping it, although I would be confident that this record attracted reviews in the print versions of NME and Melody Maker at the time. If other editors decide that there isn't a strong enough case to keep the article, I would understand and not complain, but at the very least a redirect to Shriekback would be in order, not an outright delete. Richard3120 (talk) 17:02, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NALBUM. Added sources from Boston Globe, Seattle Times, and Los Angeles Times. Album clearly has "been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble who created it." So it passes WP:NALBUM. Bakazaka (talk) 03:06, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
 * Keep, along with a thanks to Bakazaka for adding those sources. They seem to be enough for the article to meet WP:GNG and WP:NALBUM.-- SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 03:17, 21 September 2018 (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.