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.
Keep if more sources can be added, and additional information can be added, such as a "Critical reception" section, prove the album is
WP:N worthy. —
Mjks28 (
talk)
23:59, 23 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Yeah, I'm not entirely clear what you're saying here
Mjks28 but it does read that way. If you're saying that the article is keepable based on the sources I included in my nomination then please specify that, but otherwise I'm not sure of what use this comment is.
QuietHere (
talk |
contributions)
17:09, 26 June 2024 (UTC)reply
I was trying to say that the article could be improved rather than deleted by adding more information and finding new sources. However, I have tried to find sources of notability, and other than a news article promoting the album's release, I couldn't find any evidence that the album is notable, so I now agree with redirect.
Mjks28 (
talk)
22:06, 26 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Redirect to
Saliva discography. There does not appear to be significant coverage in third-party, reliable sources, but since this is a viable search term that readers may use, a redirect would be preferable in my opinion over out-right deletion. I think a redirect to the discography list would be better than a redirect to the main band article.
Aoba47 (
talk)
19:20, 1 July 2024 (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.