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 redirect to ASG_(band)#Discography per WP:NSUPER. Consider this a no consensus close. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:05, 6 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Amplification of Self-Gratification[edit]

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

fails WP:NALBUMS. no evidence of charting or significant coverage. [1] shows mainly directory listings. best i could find was this. even all music doesn't review this album [2] LibStar (talk) 02:54, 14 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 00:20, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:24, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - The WP page on the band indicates "The band plays a mixture of punk rock, southern rock, stoner rock and metal." Yeesh. I'm not going to give an opinion on the encyclopedia-worthiness of this page other than to ask a grand philosophical question: Is there a problem with having a ridiculously low notability gate on pages on albums? Or does the Pop Culture Compendium task of Wikipedia mean we should look the other way on truly forgettable releases by forgettable bands on the basis that there are people out there that would benefit, acknowledging that keeping the stuff in no way impairs WP's core mission of being a serious free encyclopedia? I don't know the answer to that. With all due respect to the nominator, what does a successful deletion here accomplish? And if we keep this gunk, what does it hurt? Yes, I know that this is not a valid AfD argument, that's why it's a comment rather than a specific Keep/Delete opinion... But, big picture: (1) why are we worrying about stuff like this? and (2) what are we gaining by making it go away? Anybody??? Carrite (talk) 01:35, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WP:NOHARM. we keep articles because they are notable not because it is not harming anyone. LibStar (talk) 01:36, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's an essay on AFD arguments not to make. I get that. What I don't understand is the reason we should be concerned about album pages in the first place. If a band is notable, isn't grinning and bearing it on the inevitable album pages a reasonable approach? I simply don't see a reward worth the effort of going through the deletion process on material like this and am curious if there's a reason other than tradition and The Sacred Rules Carried Down From the Mountain By Jimmy Wales why we should bother with this sort of stuff. Carrite (talk) 22:44, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To your philosophical questions, articles do have a cost, the cost of vandalism patrolling and the fact that a lot of minor albums are likely to be unwatched. Additionally, having too low of a bar for inclusion where pop culture is concerned is already hurting wikipedia's reputation. HominidMachinae (talk) 20:33, 21 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spartaz ^Humbug! 20:01, 29 June 2011 (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.