Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unfinished Grateful Dead Album

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.

talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats

)

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

Believe that this fails WP:NALBUM - album seems to have been planned but never released Gbawden (talk) 11:20, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:52, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 17:52, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – Meets
  WP:GNG. Source examples include: The Grateful Dead FAQ (at least 4 pages, likely more), Rolling Stone, Relix magazine, The Daily Courier (around 5 paragraphs), Observer-Reporter (1 short paragraph). Another option is to merge to Grateful Dead § Aftermath (1995 to the present), which presently does not mention this aspect of the band. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 18:09, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep - being released is not a criteria for meeting the
  WP:GNG. Sources like Rolling Stone cover it in pretty good detail. The article needs a complete rewrite (and probably a rename - if no other reason, because "album" shouldn't be capitalized) but the idea itself has enough coverage to meet the GNG. Sergecross73 msg me 19:09, 19 January 2016 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Keep – The article meets the
  WP:NALBUMS, in talking about "unreleased material", doesn't seem to distinguish between albums that are planned for future release and those, like this one, that are not. But it says, "Unreleased material (including demos, mixtapes, bootlegs, promo-only recordings) is only notable if it has significant independent coverage in reliable sources." That is the case here. — Mudwater ^(Talk) 01:27, 20 January 2016 (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.