Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Conflict (Sy Smith album) (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus. Catfish Jim and the soapdish 14:30, 23 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict (Sy Smith album)

[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)

Delete - Doesn't meet the mandatory criteria mentioned by WP:NALBUMS. The only reliable source (Billboard) mentions the album, but it does not review the album in a positive or negative rating. It does give a very small list of the album's producers and that's all the source is good for. Again, there is no point in having this article separate from singer's article. Horizonlove (talk) 07:45, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Horizonlove (talk) 07:54, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Horizonlove (talk) 07:59, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ~SS49~ {talk} 14:11, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Procedural Keep - The nominator, HorizonLove, has gone to town on Sy Smith albums, nominating some for deletion multiple times in a flat refusal to accept community decisions. See also the two nominations for Psykosoul. As for this album, Conflict, see the first AfD from just 4.5 months ago in which HorizonLove refused to accept evidence of notability to the point of failing to even see the evidence presented (note his/her last comment in the discussion). The result of that AfD was "no consensus to delete" which I don't think was accurate because the only reasons for deleting were from HorizonLove. Now see this current second nomination, in which HorizonLove has presented the exact same reasoning with no acknowledgment of what was discussed last time. This second AfD should be closed as a completely unnecessary rehash of a past argument that the nominator refuses to accept. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 18:56, 10 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Doomsdayer520: When the two users from the previous deletion discussion voted to "keep", it seemed based on popularity and bias towards the singer. However, their vote and comments implied that if the page remained, they would make edits to ensure that the page passed WP:NAlbums. There were a lot of unsourced information in the article which I removed as per WP:RELIABLE. The "Critical Reception" content was completely WP:COPYPASTE and that should have been removed quickly. And I have searched for reliable sources for this article, but it is not notable as was stated in the opening argument. Horizonlove (talk) 01:51, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 04:34, 16 March 2019 (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.