Deletion of Der Rosenkavalier (Edo de Waart recording)

Comment: this article has listed reviews from 2 different magazines (so technically meets no. 1 of ) - ''Gramophone (magazine)|Gramophone'' and ''Sound & Vision (magazine)|Sound & Vision'', and although, as i've stated in other similar afds that past consensus amongst classical album wikieditors appears to require more, i'm leaning towards retention of this article as the multiple ''Gramophone'' reviews listed by different reviewers over decades points towards the album's significance
Stance: comment
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NALBUM)

Comment: note that it also fails '''''' and ''''''. The main bulk of the article consists of long paraphrases of critics reviews - these are certainly violations of copyright
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NALBUM||WP:COPYVIO)

Comment: per criteria 1 of . The work was reviewed in ''The New York Times'' (see https://www.nytimes.com/1977/07/10/archives/whats-new-and-different-in-opera-recordings-whats-new-in-opera.html?searchResultPosition=2 here) and on more than one occasion in ''Gramophone (magazine)|Gramophone'' (see https://www.gramophone.co.uk/review/r-strauss-der-rosenkavalier-3 here and https://www.gramophone.co.uk/review/strauss-r-der-rosenkavalier-2 here). Additionally the work is included in the reference work ''American Opera Singers and Their Recordings: Critical Commentaries and Discographies'' Clyde T. McCants, McFarland Publishing, 2004, page 368, and was reviewed in the ''International Music Guide'', Derek Elley, Tantivy Press, page 222, 1978
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NALBUM)