Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The B-Sides Collection


 * 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. JForget 22:58, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

The B-Sides Collection

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Unofficial album. Google search reveals just 36 hits, with no significant mention in reliable sources. Despite being the work of a notable artist, it still fails WP:NALBUMS due to its unofficial status. Astronaut (talk) 05:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Note, the article might have been vandalised in such a way to say it was an "unofficial, fan-compilation". However, with a general lack of sales, no significant mention in reliable sources to verify either version of the article (official album or unofficial album), and no evidence presented to support a claim of notability, I am still of the opinion that it fails the notability guideline for music.  Astronaut (talk) 09:28, 6 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  --  treelo  radda  15:53, 28 July 2009 (UTC)


 * There are no references sating its fan-made. Just beacuse its only available on digital download and recieved no promotion whatsoever doesn't mean its unofficial. What you've done is edit the page, so it says its fan-made and used that as a excuse to nominate it for deletion. In fact, it is EXTREMELY unlickely that its fan-made because of the song "B to the I", which previously could only be found on the mastertapes! The Rogue Leader (talk) 13:49, 01 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I have done no such thing! I added the AfD notice in good faith and based only on what I saw in the article at the time I added the notice. If you believe I have been duped by vandalism then say that without the false accusation.  Astronaut (talk) 14:30, 2 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:18, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete unless there's evidence for this being an official release. I have a stack of Beatles bootlegs full of unreleased studio material, so I'm afraid that doesn't prove anything.  ReverendWayne (talk) 11:45, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I think before we should decide if it is fan-made or not. The thing is, HEAPS of artists release EPs & Albums which are download-only. I still doubt very much this fan-made because of the song "B to the I". I really have no idea were just a fan could get their hands on a song so rare. The only way I can think of is if they got the original mastertapes, and that's extremely unlickely. The song is literally only featured on this album and no-where else. Please consider what I'm saying! The Rogue Leader (talk) 16:42, 06 August 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, but you should consider what I said too: unreleased studio tracks are bootlegged all the time, from a CD-R, DAT, etc. that was made for evaluation by the artist, producer, record company, and so on. Bootleg LPs and CDs are full of this kind of material.  So the inclusion of an unreleased track doesn't prove that this release is legit.  What would prove it?  A mention on the artist's own website, or the record label's site, or a trade publication like Billboard would do it.  Unless such evidence can be found, we have to assume that it's not an authorized album that was released by the artist or record company.  ReverendWayne (talk) 17:17, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Follow-up: I'm told this album was going to be a legit release, but it was shelved when the artist quit singing to concentrate on acting.  Presumably the album was compiled and mastered, and someone had a reference CD-R which was the source of the download.  Now, I don't know this for sure, but it appears on its face to be a reasonable explanation.  An unreleased album, whether it circulates as a bootleg or not, would have to attract a fair amount of media attention to be sufficiently notable for an article.  Prince's Black Album would have been notable on those grounds, even before it was officially released, but that's a rare exception.  In this case I think we're left with a non-notable bootleg, unless better information turns up.  ReverendWayne (talk) 13:05, 8 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Fine then, perhaps the album shouldn't have a page. But it should be mentioned on the discography page because it was shelved. And the song 'B to the I' should be mentioned in the "Other Songs" section 'cause it doesn't appear on a studio album released by Piper. The Rogue Leader (talk) 20:50, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 15:11, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Delete, fails notability per WP:MUSIC. Searching finds no significant coverage in reliable, third-party, sources.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 00:50, 12 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete fails all our standards of notability and verifiability. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  15:24, 12 August 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.