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 keep. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:04, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Compilation album (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Unsourced. Nothing but a dicdef and OR. I can't see any way for this not to be dicdeffery. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 23:34, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. It's a 'thing' not just a term and there's more there than a dicdef. --Michig (talk) 07:02, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. Article needs to be developed, referenced, etc., but this is a type of album which is important as a marketing tool in its own right, and some times (eg UK various artists compilations in the late 60s/ early 70s, and late 70s/ early 80s) has contributed significantly to the development of popular culture. Ghmyrtle (talk) 10:29, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:22, 1 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. This is linked in ((Infobox album)) in every album article of type "compilation". —Bruce1ee^talk 12:01, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, as per all comments above. While the article here currently mightn't be great, it's an essential part of the music industry. K-tel, solely in the compilation record world, was Business Week magazine's 1994 "7th best publicly traded company in the US, based on growth and profitability." -- Zanimum (talk) 23:12, 2 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I may not understand the nominator's rationale, but I believe he says that he intend to nominate anything for deletion, be it an influential king or a high-profilic novelist, that is unsourced and contains original research (eg Edgar Wallace).--GoP_T^C_N 09:11, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Has he specifically stated this as his intentions? While unsourced and OR are bad practice, obviously, is there any way AfD organizers can just instantly close his requests, if this truly is a habit? He needs to learn how to add templates to pages, like the rest of us, not waste people's time. (I only end up on AfD every few months, whenever something I've edited in the past decade appears, so I had no idea of this being common practice for him.) -- Zanimum (talk) 16:21, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Okay, seeing this is perhaps not the place, as he's the subject of a Requests for comment. -- Zanimum (talk) 16:25, 3 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, and a ((trout)) for the nominator - Hammer, you do some good work, but there's alltogether too many of your AfDs that leave me shaking my head in order for me to leave the seafood on the shelf. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:03, 3 April 2012 (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.