Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Electric Nebraska

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=Electric Nebraska}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Electric Nebraska}})

This article, separated from Nebraska, gives the impression that the album was an actual record that was shelved and is sitting in the vault, which is not the case. Springsteen felt these recordings, which were the Nebraska songs in "electric" renditions with the E Street Band, did not capture the mood and feelings of his initial demos, which became Nebraska. I am currently rewriting the Nebraska article in my sandbox and there's only one paragraph on the "electric" version. Yes, there are quite a few sources that cover the "electric" recordings, but these renditions will be covered in the new expansion, and are already partially covered in Born in the U.S.A.. They do not warrant their own article, especially in its current state, which gives the impression that they were considered for release in 1982. (Springsteen, very briefly, considered combining the acoustic and electric stuff in a double album but decided to release the acoustic ones on their own to give them "greater stature".) – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
• Keep for now—Zmbro, you really love your massive rewrites and wholesale publishing overrides of Bowie and Springsteen album articles, instead of choosing the collaborative method of making smaller or shorter edits, allowing stuff to breathe, and having other editors weigh in. This is the second AfD that I can recall where part of your rationale seems to be "I'm rewriting this" or "I intend to rewrite this"—you seem to often just skirt OWNERSHIP issues with these DB and BS articles. I read the [https://www.hachettebookgroup.com/titles/steven-hyden/there-was-nothing-you-could-do/9780306832062/?lens=hachette-books Hyden book] when it came out, and confess that I forget how many pages he spent discussing the electric sessions (and the Marsh and Heylin books were years ago). But at the risk of turning this into a general comment, you may want to reevaluate your editing mindset... Cheers. Caro7200 (talk) 17:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
• :Slightly hurtful... but I'm certainly not the only editor on WP to rewrite articles soon their own before publishing. When I do rewrite, I try to keep as much of the old content as possible as long as it's useful. In the case of the Nebraska article in its current state, quite a bit of it has non-encyclopedic writing, on top of being sourced by entire books and not specific pages. In those instances I'm basically forced to start anew. Furthermore, it's best to write these articles wholesale so everything flows organically and there is a consistent writing style; obviously, WP is a collaborative place but quite a lot of articles actually read like they were written by 20 different people. I will admit, I did have ownership issues when I first started doing this, but I do think that has gotten better. To me, this is a much easier process than sitting around waiting for other editors to try to chime in, especially for artists like Elvis Costello, who has much less fans than Bowie or Springsteen, or even Duran Duran. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 15:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

• Merge to Nebraska (album): coverage is minimal, scope is limited, target article already has a significant amount of information on this and plenty of room for more. Zmbro's draft/future edits to the page should be outside the scope of this AfD, and I have no opinion on them. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:18, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
• Merge to Nebraska (album) - I have no idea why it's necessary to rewrite that entire album article, which has been honed over many years by dozens of competent editors. But for Electric Nebraska I agree with the previous voter. There are only fan rumors that this collection of songs may someday be released as a distinct album, and an album article in WP should be based on a distinct item for current or near-future purchase, or a fully prepared album that was totally cancelled. Here we have session recordings that didn't make it to the album, just like outtakes and leftovers that occur at any recording session. The saga can be covered adequately at the main album article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:44, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
• :I'm not rewriting the ENTIRE thing; as I stated above, I try to keep as much content from the old versions as I can when I start these projects. In this album's case, however, much of the recording content and such were sourced using entire books rather than specific pages; when I don't own the sources in question, I basically have to restart from there. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 15:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

:::Having looked at your sandbox version of the Nebraska article, I can say that you're certainly doing informative and well-cited work there. The problem is that the easiest way to move your content to the main article is lots of copy/pasting, in which case you would erase a lot of work by previous editors that merely needs to be improved rather than eradicated. If you're planning much more intricate updates and additions to the existing text, that would be a more community-oriented strategy. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

:

{{resize|91%|Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.}}
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanderwaalforces (talk) 17:32, 11 November 2024 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.