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 delete. Spartaz ^Humbug! 07:09, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Antidote of Realism EP

[edit]

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

Placed article for discussion after PROD tag was removed without reason given. After some research into this and similar articles, I've been unable to find any apparent reliable third-party sources to use as references. There are no citations used in the article to suggest or affirm notability, and no Wikipedia articles extended or linking in appear to grant notability by legacy. ♪ daTheisen (talk) 19:36, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This article only links to others within Wikipedia that seem to be of the same very narrow subject and scope, and give the appearance of a self-referencing group of bombardment articles maintained by the same limited number of editors. I decided to put a few articles up for discussion versus jumping to conclusions and trying to make a wider report. ♪ daTheisen (talk) 19:37, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: All that I can find for significant coverage is this. Fails WP:MUSIC. Joe Chill (talk) 21:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
KEEP: This record was produced by a noted producer, features noted musicians and have been on the news of major media like blabbermouth.net which is enough for it to be noted and have also received reviews worldwide. i support to keep this article. The EP have been mentioned twice on news articles by blabbermouth.net as you can see here: http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/Blabbermouth.net/news.aspx?mode=Search&searchtext=antidote+of+realism&x=53&y=7

and if you google for the title, several results show up linking it to different media websites. --Ntxdr (talk) 15:32, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP: this album have received significant coverage and includes well known musicians and produced by a known producer so it must be kept.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:51, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 23:29, 6 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

KEEP!!: i vote to keep this article. this is the first record of a noted band and it should be noted. it also features other noted musicians and is produced and mixed by a noted producer. it have also received reviews and several hits on download websites which shows that its got a huge following. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.195.215.26 (talk) 09:53, 10 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, –Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:41, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, Nothnegal the band is of questionable notability. There isn't even an entry for them on allmusic. Abductive (reasoning) 21:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. EPs do not inherit notability from the band, which is already questionable. Fails WP:NALBUM from what I can see. Significant coverage in third party sources is required here. Rehevkor ✉ 20:27, 16 November 2009 (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.