Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Workmanship (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   delete. No real argument that this album meets any of our notability requirements. J04n(talk page) 18:06, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Workmanship (album)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Doesn't meet WP:NALBUMS or WP:GNG. My first suggestion was redirect to band as possible search term, but as this was rv, I feel it needs full discussion at AfD - non-notable article. Boleyn (talk) 21:29, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:36, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Joy Electric has 27 different albums, and they've each had their own pages for many years now. It would be very cumbersome and inefficient to try to include all of them in their varying degrees of notability into the body of the band's own page.  I also don't understand why this album has been brought forward for deletion a couple of times while none of the other 26 albums have. Proctris (talk) 03:28, 17 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Your 2nd point is just the argument that WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, which is not accepted as a reason to keep. Your first point is answered by a separate discography page or just the name/small amount of info on album in band's article, not 'to try to include all of them in their varying degrees of notability into the body of the band's own page'. How does it meet WP:NALBUMS or WP:GNG? Boleyn (talk) 16:46, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't have an acceptable answer. The editor's standards aren't coincident with the emotional investment I have in these many album articles that I've created and maintained, which I suppose will also meet similar scrutiny in their own time.  I can concede that my chief reason to keep is because it's something that is important to me personally—Joy Electric has notability but certainly not very widespread, so it would be challenging to find any "notable" reference to this album in particular.  I submit that I don't have the deep technical expertice of an editor such as yourself, so I just don't understand what is gained by not having the article. Proctris (talk) 16:46, 21 May 2013 (UTC)
 * P.S. I really like how in defense of your OTHERSTUFFEXISTS counterargument, you went ahead and deleted a good number of the other album articles. I'm not going to fight anymore, since I'm clearly outgunned, but I would still love an answer to my question: what is gained by not having the album articles?  What benefit to Wikipedia and the world is achieved? Proctris (talk) 13:47, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Proctis, I have not deleted any album articles, I think you must be confused. I seem to be able to see all the articles, undeleted, except one which is now a redirect, until any reliable sources can be found. Please don't take it personally - there is no need for messages like the one you have at User:Proctris. So far no other opinions have been put forward - it may well be that the article is found to be notable, we'll have to wait and see. If it is found to be non-notable, you may want to consider putting the information together into a discography article. As you obviously care about this information, you may also want to consider looking over the other articles and seeing if you can make them more verifiable and with more reliable sources. As to what is gained by deleting non-notable articles - well hopefully an uncluttered encyclopedia, full of articles on topics judged to be notable - otherwise where do you stop - why not have an article on myself, and everybody else? But that's a discussion for the community as a whole, for a wide consensus to be reached, not for the discussion of this article. Boleyn (talk) 20:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I don't believe I'm confused, unless you are making a distinction between "deleting" and "blanking-and-redirecting;" I understand that the content is still there in the history but for all intents and purposes, the articles are "gone" (no one's going to find the content unless they really look for it). I'm using "delete" colloquially.  Here is what I am referring to:
 * You wrote the Comment on May 17 at 16:46, then you...
 * Blanked and redirected Favorites at Play at 16:52
 * Blanked and redirected The Art and Craft of Popular Music at 16:53
 * Blanked and redirected The Land of Misfits at 16:55
 * Blanked and redirected Children of the Lord at 16:57
 * Blanked and redirected The Tick Tock Companion at 16:59
 * Blanked and redirected Early Cubism at 17:03
 * Blanked and redirected Curiosities and Such at 17:05
 * Blanked and redirected Montgolfier and the Romantic Balloons at 17:07
 * Proctris (talk) 23:14, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

I wasn't making that distinction, I checked several on the list and found all but one was still a full article. If you feel those that have been redirected shouldn't have been, then of course you should revert those edits. Boleyn (talk) 06:22, 23 May 2013 (UTC)
 * I made the above links for convenience. I find it very peculiar that you say they're still articles but I get redirects on all of them.  If you didn't make those edits, then why are they showing up in the edit log at the times I gave?  Is there a bot operating under your name? Proctris (talk) 11:35, 23 May 2013 (UTC)


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


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, L Faraone  01:10, 24 May 2013 (UTC)



I was saying I checked several on the full list at the album's article. Again, if you disagree with the edits, rv them. Boleyn (talk) 13:00, 26 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Does not seem to be notable. Warden (talk) 15:59, 27 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Subject does not meet NALBUMS, and notability is not inherited.  Mini  apolis  16:50, 1 June 2013 (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.