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 merge to Van Canto. J04n(talk page) 17:41, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hero (van Canto album)[edit]

Hero (van Canto album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Non-notable album: the only reference [1] is to a blog, which is a not a reliable source. As such it fails WP:NALBUMS, which basically just applies WP:GNG. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:10, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:16, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:08, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - Here it says "Users have expressed interest in keeping the tracklists somewhere in Wikipedia". Implied in this is keeping the information about the album, which is what an encyclopedia should do. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:48, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply. Jax, was that a sneaky attempt at misrepresenting the result of the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Notability (music)#Merging_of_non-notable_albums, or did you just not bother to read the closing statement?
    Whichever it it was, Jax has quoted from the closing admin's summary of the discussion rather than from the conclusion, which rejected any blanket approval of that point: "that consensus is to Keep current wording and merge or redirect album articles that only contain an infobox and a tracklist. Given the comments above, such merges should be done in compliance with current policies and guidelines, and when such information is considered notable (or encyclopedic) enough to be included". --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:29, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply - Do I recall you saying "If an article would be overwhelmed by listing all the tracks on non-notable albums, the solution is simple: don't list all the tracks"? My point is that neither the track listings nor the pertinent details should not go away, even if the album articles do get merged into the ensemble article. IMHO, if the artist is notable, the song names, times and participants in their albums can be listed somewhere on Wikipedia. --Jax 0677 (talk) 23:37, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Jax, notability is not a matter of opinion; it is a matter of substantial coverage in reliable sources. You have provided no evidence that such coverage exists.
    You say that details "should not go away"; what you mean is that you don't want them to go away. The policy remains that it will be included "when such information is considered notable (or encyclopedic) enough to be included". --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 23:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reply WP is WP:NOTCENSORED, therefore the track listings should not be excluded from an artist or ensemble page so long as the artist is considered notable. The track listings and the album titles are information about the artist. Perhaps an AfD should be filed against van Canto? --Jax 0677 (talk) 00:02, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Stop being silly. There is no question of censorship, just of editorial commonsense. If the material overwhelms an article, some of it may be omitted; but the fact that some editors want to include material which overloads an article is no grounds for creating another article on a non-notable topic. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 01:38, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - If the article has room, include the track listing in the article. If not, do a size split. The reason that Central Station (Phoenix) has its own article is because the Metro Light Rail (Phoenix) article would otherwise be too large. This is why WP:NALBUMS says "space permitting". --Jax 0677 (talk) 02:57, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply. Jax, plaese take a few seconds to read a guideline before citing it. WP:NALBUMS explicitly says "An album requires its own notability, and that notability is not inherited and requires independent evidence". That's how we determined whether an article on an album should exist; the sentence you quoted relates solely to the question of whether the content of a non-notable album is merged or deleted. Lack of space in another article is no grounds for keeping an article on a non-notable topic. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 11:58, 10 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Reply - Then we merge the album losslessly. --Jax 0677 (talk) 01:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Keeper | 76 23:42, 16 March 2013 (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.
More