Notability[edit]

Per notability guidelines at WP:MUSIC#ALBUMS, this album is not notable. "In general, if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia."

Forever Slave has yet to assert notability. It was deleted late last week, and is currently up again. For the band to pass notability, it must demonstrate one of the characteristics under Wikipedia:Music#Criteria_for_musicians_and_ensembles. I see no evidence of any of these.

The band's article will not survive without at least asserting one of those. Until the band's article survives, I do not see how the album articles will either. Mdsummermsw (talk) 12:42, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What's your special (?) problem with Forever Slave? There are hundreds of band articles with less notability of the band. Hybscher (talk) 20:25, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I do not have a special problem with this particular one, I'm working on a lot of non-notable songs/albums/bands. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 20:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"I see no evidence of any of these." What about number one? - Aki (talk) 20:47, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

1: "It has been the subject of multiple non-trivial published works whose source is independent from the musician/ensemble itself and reliable"

Current sources:

1) Allmusic, telling us they are "Rock" and showing the two album covers. Not substantial coverage.

2) Armageddon Music, three sentances. Not substantial coverage.

There is no eveidence of non-trivial coverage in independant,reliable sources. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 21:00, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I have just reverted an addition of talk material from the main article:

A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, etc.) is notable if it meets any one of the following criteria: 5. Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e. an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of which are notable).[3] This is their second major studio album.

This is their second studio album, yes. Is Wacken Records a "major label"? Clearly not. Is Wacken Records an "independent label with a history of more than a few years"? No, Blabbermouth.net was referring to them as "the new" Wacken Records label just last month.[1] - Mdsummermsw (talk) 15:29, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

"Wacken Records (formerly trading under the name of Armageddon Music) will be incorporated into the SPV system...SPV is among the most important rock and metal labels worldwide, with top acts such as Whitesnake, Motörhead, Saxon, Iced Earth, Helloween and Type O Negative on its roster."

Is Wacken Records considered a new label even though it's just Armageddon Music renamed? And while Wacken Records "will remain an independent company," isn't it an important label, with the backing support of SPV?[2] Forever Slave isn't listed as an SPV artist, I get that, but the group is under Armaggedon/Wacken which has merged with SPV. sooo, what does this mean for FS?

side note-FS has performed in several important festivals in Europe including Wacken Open Air(Germany), Metal Female Voices Festival (Belgium), and Rock Stars Festival (Spain). [3](follow link, click on Forever Slave, then more information link). Plus, they're currently playing in Kamelot's tour.Violaillyria (talk) 20:18, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Awards?[edit]

nevermind. wrong album. Meant for alice's inferno. Violaillyria (talk) 00:30, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Important indie label?[edit]

Wacken/SPV is the joint venture of two successful independant record labels

Wacken Records is Armageddon Music renamed (after the Wacken open-air music festival founded in 1990). SPV (GmbH) is a independent label formed in 1984, with some extremely successful artist such as Motörhead, Iced Earth, and Type O-Negative. Wacken/SPV is their joint venture. Is this to your satisfaction. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blooderayne (talk • contribs) 21:30, 16 April 2008

The problem remains: the article Forever Slave does not assert notability. Telling me, on various talk pages, why they are notable doe not change that. If Wacken Records or SPV is an important indie label, make that obvious in the article. I nominated Forever Slave because the article did not assert notability. An admin agreed and the article was speedy deleted. Though the repost was sent to AfD and survived, the problem remains.

While you could add text to the article explaining the importance of the label(s), it would be rather awkward and wouldn't help any similar problems on other articles signed to Wacken or SPV. I'd suggest the easiest/best way to fix the problem is to establish articles for Wacken and/or SPV. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 12:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, looks like there is an article for SPV. SPV is a disambig page that offers SPV GmbH as an option. The problem is the articles tried to link to Wacken Records/SPV or something similar. I'll fix that. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 12:34, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tales for bad girls.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion[edit]

	An image used in this article, File:Tales for bad girls.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion at Wikimedia Commons for the following reason: Copyright violations What should I do?
	Speedy deletions at commons tend to take longer than they do on Wikipedia, so there is no rush to respond. If you feel the deletion can be contested then please do so (commons:COM:SPEEDY has further information). Otherwise consider finding a replacement image before deletion occurs. This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 12:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]