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. Cirt (
talk) 00:31, 21 January 2010 (UTC)reply
"The Very Best Of..." albums are almost never notable, and there is no evidence to suggest this one is any exception.
Thparkth (
talk) 00:32, 7 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Delete: I can't find significant coverage for this
album.
Joe Chill (
talk) 01:05, 7 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment I have found and added a single critical source that discusses this album in some depth. Whether that is sufficient might be debated but it should IMO be considered. Nothing else that looked like anything but a directory or store or blog site in the first 5 pages or so of google results.
DES(talk) 03:12, 7 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,
Timotheus Canens (
talk) 01:36, 14 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Certainly has the potential to be notable, if genuine sources can be added. But as originally written, it was pretty close to pointless. Redirect to
Woody Guthrie discography. Keep per Gongshow's improvements.
Bearcat (
talk) 06:27, 14 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment. This one's interesting, and I'm trying to make sense of it. The review that's provided also appears at
Allmusic, which helps establish at least some notability. Going from there, a look at the review makes me think it's actually for a different
"Very Best of" collection which has no review and features a completely different track listing (including the remixed bonus track referred to in the review). I don't know if these albums might somehow be related...I'll try to clean this up a bit to see if there's something worth salvaging. Gongshow Talk 07:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)reply
I added the Allmusic source and tried re-writing the article. Gongshow Talk 08:15, 14 January 2010 (UTC)reply
Keep per Gongshow's addition of a sourced critical reception section. A second review would be nice but considering the notability and historical significance of the artist, I don't believe it improves Wikipedia by deleting. J04n(
talk page) 09:56, 19 January 2010 (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.