Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ITunes Originals – Keith Urban

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.

ITunes Originals – Keith Urban

ITunes Originals – Keith Urban (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Album was not reviewed by any major third-party sources such as Roughstock, Billboard, Country Standard Time, etc. I could find no other coverage beyond the most superficial of mentions and one AllMusic review, which itself is insufficient without any other coverage. Redirect contested. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:56, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 02:56, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Hollywood Reporter [1] DonaldD23 talk to me 11:40, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  The article does not load for me at all. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 20:43, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  So? You not being able to access something has no bearing on its merit. DonaldD23 talk to me 13:38, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: the review and newly found source, as well as the Billboard chart entries make a strong case for notability. versacespaceleave a message! 15:09, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Charting is not an indicator of notability on its own. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:21, 19 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Versacespace isn't saying that charting alone was the reason for their keep vote. Did you read the sentence? REVIEW and SOURCE and BILLBOARD. Three reasons were given. DonaldD23 talk to me 13:39, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  ...which is why i included the og and added source in my rationale. versacespaceleave a message! 17:46, 20 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or Redirect. Only one short piece in the Hollywood Reporter is not enough to satisfy the criteria for inclusion. Mutliple independent sources are required. And the two billboard charts for references list Keith Urban songs, but does not cover the topic, i.e., "ITunes Originals – Keith Urban." So these refs also do not indicate notability. ---Steve Quinn (talk) 00:01, 21 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete or Redirect: I'm the one who created this article when I was younger, and as someone who now doesn't edit Wikipedia as much as I used to (but still knows a thing or two about the criteria for notability), I don't really see the point of this article existing. It may as well be just as notable as other "iTunes Original" albums. In that sense, I completely agree with the Delete move, or at the very least a redirect to Urban's discography page. --Shoesquashfan5000 (talk) 05:32, 22 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to iTunes Originals or Keith Urban discography, while I was able to find another source on top of the previously mentioned Hollywood Reporter (which is a reprint of an article from Billboard), I don’t think two sources and charting for a bit provide notability MRN2electricboogaloo (talk) 01:48, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Meets
  WP:NALBUM with sources presented above. They're reliable and in-depth enough IMV. SBKSPP (talk) 09:02, 25 June 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:22, 26 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Between Keep, Delete and Redirect, still not seeing a consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:32, 3 July 2022 (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.