Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Johnny Cash Songbook

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. -- Cirt (talk) 04:29, 31 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Johnny Cash Songbook

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

Non-notable album. Allmusic entry is blank. This appears to have been a budget line compilation without any individual notability. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Many otters • One bat • One hammer)} 22:57, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it is a
non-notable album. Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 23:04, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply
]

Concerns - This AfD is for an album that charted in 1972 (as a compilation album no less!). I have a hard time believing that there are no reviews of this album, but the problem we encounter is that there is very little information on the internet with an item that predates it by about 20 years. I believe there is a great deal of information on this album in hard copy, but the question is, where do we find it? Personally, I don't have the time to go to the library and scan microfilm for hours on end. So, let's take a review of policy. Wikipedia:Notability (music) states "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.". I believe we are all in agreement that Johnny Cash is notable. However, it also states that Wikipedia:Notability must also be considered. This also doesn't address the problem of dated items, except that "Notability is not temporary: once a topic has been the subject of "significant coverage" in accordance with the general notability guideline, it does not need to have ongoing coverage.". However, I believe I have found a possible portion of the policy that can address my concerns, specifically in Wikipedia:Notability (books), specifically point 5, "The book's author is so historically significant that any of his or her written works may be considered notable." (If you equate a book to an album, which I believe is a fair comparison.) Thoughts? Turlo Lomon (talk) 19:06, 18 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 15:39, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because it charted, almost a Top 40 album. It's a pity there is no more info on this readily available, but some articles are difficult to expand without big efforts even though they are notable. Hekerui (talk) 22:28, 23 August 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) 00:00, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Keep I agree with Hekerui and Turlo Lomon. scope_creep (talk) 19:08, 24 August 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.