Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In Recovery

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 keep. L Faraone 00:17, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In Recovery

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

Non-notable. I see no indication that the band or album is notable, no chart success, etc. Scott 10:58, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. czar · · 17:46, 7 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Courcelles 00:29, 14 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep. I keep swinging from weak keep to weak delete, but well. The reviews from AMG and Punknews provide enough commentary to produce a small stub covering how the music was received and the album's relative importance, given it is some sort of turning point for the band for being their first label release, and because of the death of drummer Scott Shad shortly before its release. Another review from staticdomain.com is available through archive.org [1], and I found this one from rockzone.com [2], but I'm completely unfamiliar with both sites and whether they are reliable — Frankie (talk) 20:29, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ymblanter (talk) 07:36, 23 May 2013 (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.