Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Map of the Past
Appearance
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:34, 21 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Map of the Past (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails to establish exactly why this is notable, also lacks anything but the band's official website as a source. The article is little more than "This is an album, here are the songs listed" and rightly should be deleted. If it ever actually does gain notoriety it would take no effort to re-add it. Ncboy2010 (talk) 22:00, 6 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 February 7. Snotbot t • c » 04:46, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. At this time, subject does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:NALBUM. I found a brief article mentioning the upcoming release, but nothing I would consider significant coverage. Gongshow Talk 21:59, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:27, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
- Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Alpha_Quadrant (talk) 05:14, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete From WP:NALBUMS:"In a few special cases, an unreleased album may qualify for an article if there is sufficient verifiable and properly referenced information about it". No argument can be made that this is a special case.—Kww(talk) 11:38, 19 February 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.