Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Scent of NC.A


 * 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. Stifle (talk) 13:46, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

Scent of NC.A

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Album fails WP:GNG. It was released digitally and physically but sold poorly. All singles released also sold poorly, and there is no evidence of significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. All listed sources are record charts. All information can be relocated to the artist's article, if need be. Shinyang-i (talk) 15:09, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions. Shinyang-i (talk) 15:09, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:17, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Delete per Shinyang-i Asdklf&#59; (talk) 22:29, 2 January 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, N ORTH A MERICA 1000 16:15, 9 January 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, KTC (talk) 00:35, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Not enough information for a separate article. --Random86 (talk) 07:52, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge/redirect to the artist. The nomination is clearly flawed - if you are proposing that "information can be relocated to the artist's article", this cannot be done if this article is deleted. Lacking sufficient information for a separate article is also a good reason to merge, not delete. There are no good arguments here for outright deletion. --Michig (talk) 16:26, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, the claim is that the article should be deleted on the basis of failing WP:GNG, and no one has contested that. So I can't really see how the nomination is "clearly flawed".  Either way, the tiny bit of info in this article is already located on at least two other articles, so no worries about losing valuable info.  In the future I will be more careful of my wording and won't try so hard to be nice in my nominations. :) Shinyang-i (talk) 08:11, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Your nomination states "All information can be relocated to the artist's article, if need be". That would be a (possibly selective) merge and would be imcompatible with deletion. If you are now arguing that the relevant information already exists in other articles, that's a different matter. There is some content here that isn't anywhere else - whether it needs to be is debateable, but either way this would still be a valid redirect to the article on the artist. --Michig (talk) 13:04, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * As I said, in the future I won't try to be nice when discussing non-notable things. It was one of my first AFD nominations. Shinyang-i (talk) 21:04, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't stop trying to be nice, just don't get surprised and upset if people disagree with you sometimes. --Michig (talk) 07:47, 28 January 2015 (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.