Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Underdog (Atlanta Rhythm Section 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 00:06, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Underdog (Atlanta Rhythm Section album)

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:NALBUMS lacks notability for it's own article, it's just a track listing Alan  -  talk  00:08, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:40, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. It's true that the article in its current state is essentially "just a track listing". However, this is an officially released album by a notable band, and per WP:NALBUMS, that is generally enough on its own to warrant an individual article. Additionally, this album has at least a couple more factors working in its favor: it charted at |RHYTHM|SECTION&sql=11:dcfpxqq5ldte~T5 number 26 on the U.S. Billboard 200, and it was certified gold by the RIAA.  Gongshow  Talk 06:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Clearly a notable album. These nominations are getting tiresome.--Michig (talk) 07:57, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Meets WP:NALBUMS as an officially released album by a notable artist. Plus it charted If it were just a track listing (which it is not) it would be a candidate for merge (per WP:NALBUMS), not delete. Rlendog (talk) 01:08, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Snow Keep. Emphatically agree w/Michig.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:20, 5 December 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.