Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Songs of Innocence (Jasper Steverlinck album)


 * 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   no consensus. After two relistings and then some, there is no consensus for one particular action regarding the article. Per the discussion, while the album appears to meet criteria #2 of WP:NALBUMS, the depth of coverage about the topic to qualify a standalone article has been stated as being borderline and debatable. It was also stated that additional Belgian sources may be available. Of note is that per WP:NALBUMS, albums must meet basic notability criteria of having received significant coverage in independent, reliable sources. As such, an album charting on a country's national music chart does not establish notability alone. Further discussion regarding sources, a merge, etc. can continue on the article's talk page. NorthAmerica1000 20:41, 23 November 2014 (UTC)

Songs of Innocence (Jasper Steverlinck album)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I'm not sure this one passes the WP:GNG, which is the criteria used at WP:NALBUMS. Sure the album topped the charts in Belgium for a handful of weeks, but I can't find any reliable sources providing coverage of the album sufficient for it to merit its own article. Google books returns a handful of hits, but all appear to be a simple listing of the Belgian charts in Billboard and nothing more. Not for nothing, there does not appear to be an article on this album in either the Dutch or French Wikipedias. In the interest of full disclosure, I am nominating this for deletion only after seeing a move request on the talk page of the similarly named U2 album. -- Calidum 02:41, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 06:21, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 06:21, 25 October 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment. As it was a number one album in Belgium it's certainly notable. The consideration then is whether there is sufficient content for a standalone article or whether it should be covered in the article on the artist - either way we don't need these to come to AfD. It seems very likely that the album received sufficient coverage in Belgium to expand the article, if we know where to look for it. --Michig (talk) 08:44, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep - as the nom says, he is nominating this for deletion only after seeing a move request on the talk page of the similarly named U2 album. and as User:Michig says as it was a number one album in Belgium it's certainly notable. So the AFD appears to purely for the purpose of presenting the new U2 album with a title contrary to Naming conventions (music), a guideline with which the nom disagrees per comment on the U2 album talk page. In ictu oculi (talk) 07:52, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Please show me the significant coverage of the album that merits it having a standalone article. -- Calidum  15:38, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Coverage does exist, e.g. this, and this states that the album's success went beyond "topping the charts in Belgium for a handful of weeks" and actually topped the chart for 5 weeks and spent 41 weeks in the top 50, and a DVD of the same title was released. Whether there is enough to justify a standalone article is debatable (and for an an album released in 2003 offline sources are perhaps likely to exceed what can be found online), but the only real alternative is to merge to the artist on the article. I don't see any chance that this will be deleted outright. This should have been dealt with as a merge proposal. --Michig (talk) 16:16, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Here's two more examples of coverage from a search on the Belgian Google:, . --Michig (talk) 16:25, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Merging is a possible outcome of any AFD. -- Calidum  17:17, 1 November 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Michig, I'm not clear if you support leaving as a standalone or merging. If merged the infobox would be lost to mobile phone readers (who are the majority for pop articles apparently). Also if merged the rationale on the album cover jpg would need to be changed to avoid the jpg being lost. I'm not suggest that alternatively/additionally perhaps we could merge Songs of Innocence (U2 album) to U2 as it hasn't done as well as the Belgian album did.
 * With the amount of content that we have and could potentially add using the sources found so far I would lean towards merging this article, but if more is found it could be kept as a standalone article. That's a different issue to 'real world notability' which is clearly there for both albums. The U2 album has far too much content to be merged. --Michig (talk) 07:29, 2 November 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Michig, as I said no one's seriously suggesting merging the U2 album. Am I wrong that merging an album into a discography means losing the infobox and album jpg? ... in any case I think a merger is now moot, I had a look at the 2 Dutch-language sources you provided and found 2 more long Dutch articles, currently they are just clip cited footnotes, but it would take little effort to expand the stub, and that's what expand stubs are for. In ictu oculi (talk) 04:22, 3 November 2014 (UTC)
 * User:Calidum please note that even if your proposal here to delete succeeded per WP:NCM you would still not have acheived the object of removing "U2" from (U2 album) since WP:NCM does not distinguish between article content and standalone articles. In ictu oculi (talk) 00:04, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 04:38, 2 November 2014 (UTC)

 
 * Note that Talk:Songs of Innocence (U2 album) RM mentioned above has concluded with the decision that the U2 album is not primary topic over William Blake, nor the only album. In ictu oculi (talk) 18:35, 9 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 08:05, 10 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Spent ages in Belgian charts as mentioned, was a number 1. I would argue it therefore fulfills notability per WP:MUSIC. JTdale   Talk 11:16, 10 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Jasper Steverlinck per WP:NALBUMS - "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article". In the future, this article may be resurrected if enough reliably-sourced information is provided to create at least a Start Class article. Quality over quantity, eh? Developing articles is far more respected than simply creating as many stubs as possible. ŞůṜīΣĻ ¹98¹ Speak 10:16, 14 November 2014 (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.