Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buck Naked (2nd nomination)

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 redirect to Barenaked Ladies. per Lifebaka, whose comments are a perfectly valid closing rationale that I had arrived at independently prior to reading his/her comments. causa sui (talk) 15:51, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Buck Naked

)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

)

Only sources are primary. Previous merge attempts declined. Last AFD closed as no consensus after two relists due to complete lack of participation. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 03:10, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'm not going to advise one way or the other here. I'll say from my perspective that this is a significant band with this being an informative and useful piece — which doesn't hold much water at AfD. Still, it should be an objective here — if this subject is found lacking in terms of notability — to port this information to the (bulletproof) article on The Yellow Tape. Keep or Merge, don't delete. I presume that this is the nominator's intent as well. While demo tapes are generally not considered notable in the same way that albums are, this seems to have been released and re-released for sale at shows over a protracted period of time... It might be reasonable to conceive of this as a "cassette-only release" rather than a "demo tape" per se. It's a tough call. Carrite (talk) 15:45, 30 August 2011 (UTC) Last edit: Carrite (talk) 15:48, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 18:29, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I know i'll be discriminated against due to the fact that i'm an IP, but this is a famous demo by a band extremely popular (or at least at a time) in Canada. The article is also of surprisingly high quality for an article about a demo tape, although i'm not sure if that is a valid argument. Sadly, this article does not have very much traffic, so it will most likely simply be deleted due to lack of a consensus. 65.190.66.32 (talk) 04:59, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I agree that if there's any way this page can be kept, it should be. It has a lot of detail and good information, and I see pages for a lot of bands' demos and early independent releases, etc. Or, failing being able to keep it, is there anywhere it could be merged? Or at the absolute least, I'd say it should be turned into a redirect to Barenaked Ladies' discography page, not deleted. DeadpoolRP (talk) 12:13, 5 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"By a notable act" is not a reason to keep; see
WP:NOTINHERITED. A redirect is fine. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 00:10, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 17:02, 6 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - If we cannot keep this article, I say we should merge this and all other Barenaked Ladies demo tapes into one single page. This could also be a good way to include more information on much less notable tapes such as the unreleased Barenaked Recess and Variety Recordings. Buck Naked would simply redirect to the demo tapes page. 65.190.66.32 (talk) 04:15, 7 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per
Stuartyeates (talk) 23:05, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Keep. Like DeadpoolRP said, it has a lot of useful information about the tape. The tape also has several early versions of many of the band's most popular songs. If the article is deleted, we should merge all the demo tapes like that IP address said. ChineseLamps (talk) 23:50, 10 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I don't know a ton about Wikipedia policy versus essays, but I notice that the page linked to twice above at
WP:NOTINHERITED specifically says at the top that it's just an essay that "contains the advice or opinions of one or more Wikipedia contributors on Wikipedia:Deletion policy" and it's not actually Wikipedia policy. So how does citing the information on an essay work when they're opinion, not policy? DeadpoolRP (talk) 00:38, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

It may be, but still. There are no sources for these EPs beyond primary sources. No sources, no article. "It's by a notable artist!" doesn't hold water and you know that. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 02:02, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

That was a legitimate question, by the way. I've never heard of Wikipedia essays before and thus have no idea what the policy is regarding essay vs. policy, hence the question. I'm not sure why Wiki editors always insist on telling me what I do or do not know . . . DeadpoolRP (talk) 00:17, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - lacks the significant coverage in reliable sources needed to establish notability. Bridgeplayer (talk) 23:54, 13 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to close this, but I worry that the way I was going to would come across as a
WP:GNG seems to be spot on, implying that we perhaps shouldn't have an article at this title; this argument is also not refuted. Second, the keep argument that the content in the article is good also seems to be spot on, and is not refuted. It seems to me that we should split the difference and redirect the article to Barenaked Ladies, leaving the content in the history to be merged at editorial discretion. The suggestion above for creating an article to cover all of the Barnaked Ladies' demo tapes is also worth looking into. Cheers, everyone. lifebaka++ 03:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

My worry with that is that the information will simply be forgotten and never be fully merged. A band article typically doesn't have album information, as it doesn't fit well. But this article has too much interesting and important information to simply summarize it. I can make a draft of a "Barenaked Ladies demo tapes" page in my userspace if anyone has interest in the merging idea. 03:58, 14 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChineseLamps (talk • contribs)

I have no objection to a redirect provided that only material that is reliably sourced is merged; and that is, at present, very little. Bridgeplayer (talk) 13:07, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge sourced content to
WP:NNC, and it seems to be fairly important in their history. The title is a plausible enough search term so a redirect would be good too. Alzarian16 (talk) 14:51, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

Comment. I've actually put together the demo tapes page in a subpage of my userspace. You can see it by clicking here. Please tell me if it will work well before I move it to an actual page. ChineseLamps (talk) 22:33, 14 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to
^{The clock is ticking....} 02:29, 15 September 2011 (UTC)[reply
]

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.