Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In Nuce

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 no consensus. Listed for 13 days with no arguments for deletion aside from the nominator. However, only one of the !voters addressed the notability of this recording. This is not a consensus. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:32, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In Nuce

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

Bootleg with no assertion of notability. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 05:01, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Provisional Keep There are quite a few GHits for it, and I'm wondering if a bootleg that helps document the formative years of a very notable band might be sufficient for notability in itself? Some more detailed searching is needed, but I don't really have the time now -- Boing! said Zebedee 12:47, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, yes, Queen is a great band, the better. What can be more notable?.--Eduardofoxx13 (talk) 19:48, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Gongshow ^Talk 17:51, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:04, 10 May 2010 (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.