Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Black Eyed Peas Family Best
=[[The Black Eyed Peas Family Best]]=
:{{la|The Black Eyed Peas Family Best}} – (
:({{Find sources|The Black Eyed Peas Family Best}})
Relatively un-notable compilation per WP:NMUSIC, released in limited territories and did not receive significant coverage from third party reliable sources. Even if a reference is found for the chart position, an article is not required to list a track listing and one chart position. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 14:05, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Comment. Would you consider an album that was released only in the US to have been released in limited territories, therefore limiting its notability? Which Japanese sources did you search for significant coverage? --Michig (talk) 15:00, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
::Of course having a limited release do not necessarily limit a subject's notability. However this is the English language wikipedia and thus the primary sources of reference will be English language sources. Of course that doesn't limit the ability of this version of wikipedia to have a detailed article regarding an international subject. I had a brief look using popular search engines and could not find anything substantial about the release. Also the only reference given (Amazon) is an import release, not even a Japanese release for what is supposedly a Japanese-release only album. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 15:34, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
:*So why mention the limited release in the deletion rationale? This is the English language Wikipedia but non-English sources carry just as much weight as those in English and if sufficient sources in Japanese exist then it's just as notable as it would be if we could find English sources. I asked about searching for Japanese sources as I rarely find a Google search useful for Japanese subjects. --Michig (talk) 15:45, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
:Per WP:NMUSIC, the release didn't receive coverage from reliable third-party sources. Though the release only took place in Japan, it is an american artist so you would have assumed it would still get coverage regardless. Either way without coverage beyond a track listing there no reason for an independent article. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 [talk] 18:39, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
- Keep or Merge to will.i.am discography unless coverage can be found with which to expand the article. I don't really see how the project benefits from deleting this. At the very least some of the details should be incorporated into the discography article and this redirected there. --Michig (talk) 17:35, 10 February 2013 (UTC)
:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:16, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:04, 17 February 2013 (UTC)
:Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
:Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, LlamaAl (talk) 00:10, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
- Merge is probably worthwhile, but shouldn't it be merged to The Black Eyed Peas discography? Stalwart111 01:46, 24 February 2013 (UTC)
- If you read the article, the album was a compilation by will.i.am, despite its title. Michaelzeng7 (talk) 01:55, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
::*Hmm, yeah, I couldn't work that out - I thought it was just a him-as-a-producer sort of thing. But hey, I'm just as happy for it to be merged to will.i.am discography if that is more appropriate. Stalwart111 03:14, 3 March 2013 (UTC)
- Merge or redirect to Black Eyed Peas discography—fails WP:NALBUMS criteria for a standalone music article. —WP:PENGUIN · [ TALK ] 23:53, 26 February 2013 (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.