Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/There Is No Time

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. Feel free to discuss redirect on the appropriate talk pages. Missvain (talk) 16:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There Is No Time

[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)

Non-notable album GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Another one from the flood of Soul Crusher's non-notable bands and albums, this time it's an album. Surprised it hasn't been deleted or at least tagged for notability yet. Well, I tagged it and I also nominate it for deletion so both are solved. Problems are the same as usual: the sources are not even close to be reliable. The Allmusic "review" is just a listing of the bands that appear on this album, a track listing, and user reviews. The other sources are unreliable blogs that are not even about this album, it's just mentioned trivially, and one listing of albums where this title appears. Finally we have the album booklet and a discogs page. So at the end of the day, it's just a usual non-notable album by Soul Crusher. I am actually thankful he has been indefinitely blocked, even if it sounds harsh. We don't need people like him here - ones who create lots and lots of articles about non-notable stuff, and don't give a hoot about notability and warnings. People like him just create problems. Btw, here is a fun fact: There is a very similar user on Hungarian Wikipedia, who has created a lot of non-notable songs' articles, although the artist is always notable. (So in that aspect, he's better than Soul Crusher, but just a tiny bit. At least his articles have a little speck of notability by said songs being performed by notable artists - even though just because the artist is notable, not every song by him/her is.) So anyways, those songs haven't been charted and the sources are always unreliable. And worst of all, they manage to stay there for 2 to 5 years, as he had written those articles between 2015 and 2018. Unlike Soul Crusher though, he has written articles on notable musicians/songs as well. His talk page is also full of Afd warnings. So yeah, Soul Crusher isn't the only one. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:22, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:22, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 18:22, 20 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Note that there is no place to redirect because it is a various-artists compilation on an obscure label that has no WP article. We have evidence that the album exists but only in the form of brief announcements (including the so-called "review" at AllMusic), basic retail entries, and occasional mentions in a few articles that are actually about someone who was on it. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 19:55, 21 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NALBUM; AllMusic review is not sufficient for a standalone article, HĐ (talk) 12:58, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The bigger problem is that said "review" isn't actually a review, it's just a bare sentence that lists the bands that appear on this album. If it was a proper review, we would have one reliable source and that's still not enough. But in this state, we have no reliable sources at all. GhostDestroyer100 (talk) 14:47, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Ras Dva. An article has been created for the label, which at the moment seems to meet notability criteria based on some sources that are mentioned on its talk page. --Kinu ^t/_c 03:56, 28 December 2020 (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.