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 for the whole shebang. Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:45, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Codex Necro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:NALBUMS. very limited coverage and no charting. also nominating from same band for the same reasons:

• When Fire Rains Down from the Sky, Mankind Will Reap as It Has Sown
• Hell Is Empty and All the Devils Are Here
• Eschaton (album)
• Total Fucking Necro
• In the Constellation of the Black Widow
• Domine Non Es Dignus

LibStar (talk) 07:48, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - the six additional nominated articles do not have AfD tags -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:29, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done All 6 articles have AfD tags and their creators have been notified of this discussion. —KuyaBriBri^Talk 14:14, 10 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

thanks, sorry forgot to do that. LibStar (talk) 03:47, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:32, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment/Suggestion – I think some of these articles could be saved (In the Constellation of the Black Widow being the most likely, in fact I'd say it's sourced enough to establish notability and thus pass WP:NALBUMS now). I'd be willing to put in some effort into better sourcing them and giving them more evidence of notability, but right now I don't have the time (over the next couple/few months I should though, I moved recently so most of my magazines are in boxes). So my suggestion is this: instead of outright deleting them, make them redirects to the band's article (Anaal Nathrakh). If other editors try to revert them without putting any effort into fixing them, I'll take responsibility for reverting them back (if no one else gets there first). Once I have a chance to dig through my boxes of magazines and find relevant articles, I can start fixing them, and leave a notice on their respective talk pages when I think they're ready to come back. This way we don't lose information that could end up being worthy of being on Wikipedia. Thoughts? MrMoustacheMM (talk) 00:31, 13 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:43, 17 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 01:11, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

• Vote: Keep them all. This is not the best-known of bands but it's got a following; it's not some obscure garage band. And information about each album, including track listings and information about production and so forth, encompasses enough detail to where each album deserves its own page. Methychroma (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:28, 29 May 2011 (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.