Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paws.

{{AFD help}}

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

:({{Find sources AFD|title=Paws.}})

With the addition of the reviews from [https://gigwise.com/news/52341/ Gigwise] and [https://web.archive.org/web/20150916175454/https://rocksound.tv/reviews/read/pull-tiger-tale-paws Rock Sound] I was able to find, this might, at the absolute barest minimum, scrape by SIGCOV. That, of course, is assuming the reliability of The Fly (whose review is archived [https://web.archive.org/web/20090910002601/http://www.the-fly.co.uk/words/reviews/album-reviews/5707/pull-tiger-tail here]), a publication I'm completely unfamiliar with. So maybe, just maybe, this could be a keep, but I'm very unconfident in it. I vote redirect to Pull_Tiger_Tail#Discography (although that's gonna need a check for sources as well, it's not looking very good either). QuietHere (talk) 14:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and England. QuietHere (talk) 14:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

• Keep. Passes WP:SIGCOV and WP:NALBUM per the three independent reviews produced by the nominator. @{{u|QuietHere}} [https://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/press/the-fly-once-the-uk-s-most-read-music-magazine-to-close-9177126.html Here is an article on The Fly] in The Independent. It was a notable publication. We have an article on it at The Fly (magazine). Also, you might consider whether The Lost World (album) is notable while you are digging into Pull Tiger Tail. That article has zero references at present.4meter4 (talk) 15:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
• :1. Thank you for this info on The Fly. It being defunct since 2014 probably explains a significant amount of why I've never seen it around. 2. Had a look at The Lost World and came up empty so here's an AfD for that. QuietHere (talk) 15:24, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
• Comment: I would consider The Fly to have been a reliable source, and remember it well from living in London in the 2000s, where it was widely available in almost every location that had some connection to music – it may have been free, been published by the owners of London music venues, and looked like a booklet, but it most definitely was several steps up from a zine, with serious professional full-time journalists and writers and an editorial team. Editor JJ Dunning is now editor-in-chief at Red Bull Media UK, and has written for The Guardian and Q. Deputy editor Harriet Gibsone has written several pieces for The Guardian. Chief staff writer Ben Homewood is now the features editor for Music Week. Former editor Niall Doherty became deputy editor of Q after leaving The Fly and has written for Mojo, Classic Rock, Rolling Stone UK, NME, FourFourTwo and others. Richard3120 (talk) 15:34, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
• :Thank you as well. I also see they have an entry at RSMUSIC. I probably should've checked more on this site before posting my submission. QuietHere (talk) 16:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

:::@{{u|QuietHere}} You might consider withdrawing your nomination. I can assist in closing it for you if that is case. That said, I think the other album nom was defintely worth bringing to AFD.4meter4 (talk) 16:15, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

::::I agree with {{u|4meter4}}. I know WP:THEREMUSTBESOURCES is not a valid argument for AfD (rightly so), but Pull Tiger Tail did receive airplay and media coverage during their brief career, and I strongly suspect there is coverage of both the band and this album in print issues of NME and possibly Q from the time. I'd be far less convinced that the rarities album got much attention, though. Richard3120 (talk) 17:08, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

:::::@{{u|Richard3120}} I don't know why you linked "THEREMUSTBESOURCES". We have three independent critical reviews already linked here in the discussion. The sources are here for all to see already.4meter4 (talk) 17:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

::::::{{re|4meter4}} I was talking about my statement that this would have received coverage in NME and Q. But I take your point that the existing three sources are enough for this to pass WP:NALBUM without additional hypothetical sources. Richard3120 (talk) 17:13, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

::::Yeah, that's a fair point. Consider this AfD withdrawn. QuietHere (talk) 00:15, 8 October 2022 (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.