Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Smashing Pumpkins demo albums


 * 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. —  Aitias  // discussion 22:20, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

The Smashing Pumpkins demo albums

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

This article fails the basic album notability requirements listed at NALBUMS. These demo tapes are not notable and have not been the subject of much third-party coverage. Also, contributors to this discussion should keep in mind that notability is not c. While The Smashing Pumpkins are very notable, not everything associated with them is. WesleyDodds (talk) 14:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong keep well sourced article, wikipedia is not paper. Notability (music), one of the many bastard children of the controvesial notability guidelines, which became a guideline because of the input of a handful of people (see page history in 2005). As a guideline now, it "is best treated with common sense and the occasional exception." Smashing Pumpkins is a very mainstream band, having immense media coverage, this is one of those exceptions. travb (talk) 14:26, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * "Well-sourced"? There's no citations in the article at all. WesleyDodds (talk) 14:30, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The_Smashing_Pumpkins_demo_albums travb (talk) 14:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * There's no inline citations, and the only source used are various pages from a fansite, which does not fulfill Wikipedia guidelines for acceptable sources. WesleyDodds (talk) 14:33, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, as I noted in the nomination, notability is not inherited, so the Pumpkins being really famous has no bearing on this article's notability. WesleyDodds (talk) 14:36, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Inherent notability and Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions are mere essays, which editors can "Heed them or not at your own discretion." The Inherent notability article mentions arguments for inherent notability. travb (talk) 14:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * I still don't see a solid rational for keeping beyond the fact that the band is well-known. Once again, these demos were not commercial released and thus did not chart on any sales chart, there are no inline citations, the only reference is a fansite, and as the primary writer of The Smashing Pumpkins, my research for the topic has indicated the the amount of secondary sources available for these demos is close to nil. There is no reason to have an article about these demos. WesleyDodds (talk) 14:55, 6 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong delete - demos are not notable; anything of interest goes in the main SP article. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  14:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete There are absolutely no sources for any of these demos. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:41, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete no inherited notability, especially without reliable, third-party sources. Jauerbackdude?/dude. 16:17, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete not only non-notable (notability is not inherited) but I also argue that it's indiscrimate information. MuZemike  ( talk ) 20:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note — for full disclosure, I am and have been for a long time a big fan of The Smashing Pumpkins, and I do have nearly all their albums and songs, released and unreleased (including the epic fail that was Zwan). I just don't think this belongs here for the reasons I have stated above. MuZemike  ( talk ) 23:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, Lacks sources, most demos lack notability but any of interest can be in the band's main article. Gandygatt (talk) 21:54, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: no reliable 3rd party sources WP:MUSIC. JamesBurns (talk) 07:19, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Non-notable demos with lack of citations. Clearly fails WP:NM and WP:V. Diverse  Mentality  21:08, 7 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:24, 9 January 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.