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. WP:SNOW MBisanz ^talk 01:45, 28 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It (MSI Singles)

[edit]

Limited edition collector's item package that simply bundles 3 separate singles together and was only available to North Americans who ordered an album directly from the band. Non-notable, fails WP:NALBUMS. Prod removed without comment. TheJazzDalek (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. —TheJazzDalek (talk) 19:28, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting release if you ask me. Merge & redirect to If.--Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord ² 19:46, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as a non-plausible search term, fails notability per WP:MUSIC#Songs. No awards, no chart, no covers, no WP:RS . Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 22:56, 19 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: non-charting non-notable album WP:NALBUMS. JamesBurns (talk) 01:14, 20 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is a notable release on the dance charts. I question the motivations of the person who nominated it as well, as he/she has suggested other MSI articles for deletion.98.220.43.195 (talk) 20:32, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Two of the three singles in this bundle charted, that's why those songs have their own articles. This package under discussion did not chart anywhere, and is only three singles wrapped up together; not a CD compiled from singles—3 separate CD singles stuck together. It's an extremely limited fan/collector's item with absolutely no notability. There's no media coverage of It, It did not chart, and It does not inherit notability from the individual singles. Additionally, please assume good faith—I have been cleaning up the immense collection of articles surrounding this band. Some non-notable articles have been deleted, yes, but I have also added proof of notability to some of their articles that previously had none (or didn't even claim notability). The intention is to improve the project; I don't have anything against this clearly notable band. TheJazzDalek (talk) 21:03, 23 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, --Ged UK 17:31, 24 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No indication of notability for the collection. Duffbeerforme (talk) 04:09, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no reliable coverage. A-Kartoffel (talk) 07:57, 27 March 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.