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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 11:37, 22 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Catalyst (The Blank Theory album)

[edit]

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

Non-notable album by a barely notable artist, with zero valid supporting references. One reference is to the bands Wikipedia page, and the other 3 are too discography sites, hardly significant coverage. A quick google search brings up nothing substantial enough to meet WP:GNG. -War wizard90 (talk) 03:17, 6 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - agree with nominator that there is no notability to this album (or probably in fact to this band) ♠PMC♠ (talk) 02:11, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | ^Talk 00:39, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:40, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No evidence of notability. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:35, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am not even sure if the band is notable here. But clearly, the album is not - no charting or significant coverage. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 04:55, 22 January 2017 (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.