Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Duk Da Fuk Down
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 merge to
talk) 21:12, 21 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
Duk Da Fuk Down
Non-notable album from a band of questionable notability. Fails
WP:NALBUMS. According to Allmusic, the album never charted. [1]. Unlikely search term make redirect a poor option and the possibility that the band article itself won't survive AfD does as well. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:54, 1 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 21:51, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
- Weak keep. Looks like enough Ghits exist to prove notability. (Side note: I listen to rap, but after looking at the cover, I don't think I'd buy this album.) THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 22:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Since we know just counting Ghits doesn't make something notable, would you mind explaining how you feel the album passes ]
- I said weak because the album is available for purchase at Amazon -- but some users don't consider that enough for notability. (BTW, I changed your wikilink to WP:ALBUMS is a WikiProject.) THE AMERICAN METROSEXUAL 05:48, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I said weak because the album is available for purchase at Amazon -- but some users don't consider that enough for notability. (BTW, I changed your wikilink to
- Since we know just counting Ghits doesn't make something notable, would you mind explaining how you feel the album passes ]
- I'd be one of those users. Considering that Amazon will sell books from vanity publishers etc, I can't consider simply being for sale to be much of an indicator of notability. But thanks for the response. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:25, 8 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delizzle - not a notable album, no meaningful content that is not already covered at hablo. 11:51, 13 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 20:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply
Note :Relisted for a last time for more discussion. JForget 20:09, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep per WP:NALBUM, specifically "In general, if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia." Seeing as Psychopathic Rydas is notable enough, the album is inherently notable. That said, I wouldn't mind a merge into PR, per "Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article" Cheers, I'mperator 00:18, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "then officially released albums may have sufficient notability". Niteshift36 (talk) 04:03, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- So I guess my question is if you are ok with the merge and it doesn't really meet the keep criteria, why your !vote is "keep" instead of "merge" then? I'm just asking out of curiosity, not really arguing it with you. Niteshift36 (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Meh...I'm fine w/ either...how about Merge into Psychopathic Rydas. I guess the point I'm trying to get at is that the info is perfectly valid and shouldn't be deleted. Cheers, I'mperator 00:31, 16 September 2009 (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.