Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Colder Places

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 speedy delete. WP:A9 Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 12:35, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Colder Places

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NALBUM. Created by a SPA, has been PRODded but the article creator reverted the PROD without explanation. The band do not have their own article so there is no redirect target, and there are no reliable independent sources. The last two sources are the band's website and their Spotify page – the Outburn article is an exact replica of the press release from the band's website. The New Noise Magazine article was an premiere of the album exclusively presented in collaboration with the band on the website, and is simply a link to stream the album, along with the press release again. The Frontview article just reports the premiere of the album on New Noise Magazine and replicates the press release yet again. The Moshville Times article is a primary source interview with the band on a non-RS website that doesn't mention the album at all. So everything is the same press release issued by the band, along with links to view the videos or stream the album. The only source which might be an RS is this review [1] but that's just one review, not multiple in-depth coverage, and I haven't found anything better – there are a couple of reviews on websites which definitely don't pass WP:RS [2], [3], and one from a promotion company that lists the band among their clients [4]. Richard3120 (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Richard3120 (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Richard3120 (talk) 14:14, 1 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Does not meet WP:NALBUM, and not enough in-depth sourcing to pass WP:GNG. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 00:28, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Fails WP:NALBUMS. Album by a non-notable band. Lack of coverage in multiple reliable independent sources, no reviews, no charting, no certifications or accolades. Clearly doesn't demonstrate notability to warrant a stand-alone article. Ashley yoursmile! 08:45, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - The user behind this article has also attempted an article on the band, which has not yet graduated from the Draftspace process due to scant evidence of the band's notability. If they are non-notable so is their album, which has also received no significant coverage in its own right except for one or two blog-like reviews. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:10, 2 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per everyone above. The band themselves are not notable, so why should their album have an article? GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 16:14, 3 February 2021 (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.