Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enchanted Forest (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.

The result was merge to Treephort. Cirt (talk) 15:12, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

=[[Enchanted Forest (album)]]=

:{{la|Enchanted Forest (album)}} ([{{fullurl:Enchanted Forest (album)|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enchanted Forest (album)}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

Non-notable album. Qqqqqq (talk) 06:21, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 11:56, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Keep - Per WP:NALBUMS, "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." No reason given to believe this album should be an exception. Rlendog (talk) 19:11, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment On the other hand, the paragraph just before the one you quoted reads, "All articles on albums, singles or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines, with significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Whether or not there is significant outside coverage may be the subject of debate, but just because there is an article about a band does not mean that each of that group's albums is sufficiently notable. Qqqqqq (talk) 19:29, 10 June 2009 (UTC)
  • If there is an article on the band, the band is likely notable. Which means that any of their officially released albums may be notable. There is no reason given why this album is non-notable. Rlendog (talk) 20:04, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
  • The burden is to provide evidence that a subject is notable, not that it is not notable. Qqqqqq (talk) 20:54, 15 June 2009 (UTC)
  • And the article on the band cites no sources, either. I'm proposing deletion of that article next. The asserted notability of the band has not yet been demonstrated. Qqqqqq (talk) 07:07, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Merge. To the band article, it's short and there doesn't seem to be much here. -- Banjeboi 12:10, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Merge per above by Banjeboi Nja247 07:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

: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.