Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ain't No 'H' in Ripcordz, Dork-Face

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 and redirect to Ripcordz. czar 07:31, 24 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Just adding a note for clarity, in case somebody reviews this discussion in the future and is confused that two of the three redirects created here have since been deleted: in the process of reference-repairing the band's article, it became clear that two of the three titles were actually wrong names for the albums, which should actually have been titled There Ain't No H and Ripcordz Are Go(d). So both redirects are still in place, but have been moved to the correct titles. Bearcat (talk) 13:35, 29 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ain't No 'H' in Ripcordz, Dork-Face (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)

It's Never Too Late to Annoy Your Parents (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)

Ripcordz Are Go (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)

I realize punk bands are not known for mainstream popularity, but this album has absolutely no sources to be found, even after a search. There would be something if this was considered important to the genre. It has been unsourced since it was created and nothing will change to make it notable. TheGracefulSlick (talk) 08:24, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 08:55, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Quebec-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 14:03, 14 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. To be fair, this was created at a time (2006) when our notability standards for albums were a lot looser and a lot less dependent on standalone reliable source coverage about the album than they are now — at the time, all it took to get an album kept was the fact that the band who recorded it were notable enough to have an article. That's not the rule that pertains anymore, however — and on a ProQuest search, all I can find for further coverage is two glancing namechecks of its existence in articles about the band. That's just not enough under WP:NALBUMS as it stands today. And just to be clear, this is not a question of me lacking personal familiarity with the topic — I personally attended a Ripcordz concert during their tour supporting this very album (crap, I'm old!) — but the referencing needed to properly support an article about it simply isn't there. Bearcat (talk) 22:44, 16 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Update: I've also added the band's other two albums which do also have articles, as they're subject to the same total lack of sourcing. Bearcat (talk) 22:53, 16 December 2016 (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.