Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 03:37, 10 March 2013

A Storm to Come

A Storm to Come (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. Tagged as unreferenced since Nov 2009, so it has no sources which could be assessed to see whether it meets WP:NALBUM. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 09:11, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 10:15, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

• Keep (or redirect to van Canto at a minimum) - Merging too many album articles losslessly (track listings and personnel included) into the ensemble article would be messy. The number of albums with full track listings and album info to be merged into a musical ensemble or artist page was discussed here. Are we going to now start a mass deletion campaign of all non-notable albums? --Jax 0677 (talk) 16:48, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
  • When a topic is not notable, we don't need to aim for a lossless merge; we can summarise. If the topic is not notable, it does not require that much detail, and should not be covered in that much detail.
    In any case, I note that Jax0677 does not make any claim that the topic is notable, let alone evidence that it is notable. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 22:10, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:09, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

• Reply - Here it says "Users have expressed interest in keeping the tracklists somewhere in Misplaced Pages". Implied in this is keeping the information about the album, which is what an encyclopedia should do. --Jax 0677 (talk) 22:29, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

• Reply. Jax, was that a sneaky attempt at misrepresenting the result of the discussion at Misplaced Pages 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 - 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 Misplaced Pages. 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) 00:06, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

• 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) 01:39, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

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) 02:56, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

• Keep - I don't see any point in removing this page. The referenced discussion about notability did not reach a clear consensus or guideline. Misplaced Pages is well-known for being a good repository of track listings. Removing this page leaves Misplaced Pages less complete. Merging the listing to the artist page would make it cluttered and reduce its objectivity. The article is not badly written nor badly formatted, it does not misrepresent information nor causes any confusion or ambiguity with other topics. Fbergo (talk) 03:24, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Reply - Thank you Fbergo! --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:37, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Media and music)
• AfD debates