Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Population Control (album)
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 keep. (
]Population Control (album)
- Population Control (album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
I had redirected this, but the author seems to think this requires an AFD to redirect. Obviously, they are mistaken. Album without charting. Sourcing isn't sufficient to demonstrate notability, itunes, amazon, etc. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ 13:31, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep Clearly enough coverage on this album for it to warrant an article like here, here, here and here. Koala15 (talk) 13:37, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment There are many hits on this on Google, but they are mostly sites that review or let you buy the album. If these are considered reliable sources, than the article should be kept, but if they're not, the article should be merged and redirected. Citrusbowler (talk) (contribs) (email me) 15:21, 16 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:14, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The album charted on the ]
- Keep. Has met message me! 04:56, 17 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep: The album has enough significant coverage. SL93 (talk) 19:06, 19 June 2013 (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.