Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In the Faxed Atmosphere
me again) per .  states {{xt|... an album does not need to be by a notable artist to require a standalone article if it meets the General notability guideline.}} More seems to have been written about the album than the band, hence the article content. While I concede that the nominator does have a point about the quality and focus of ''some'' of the sources, I don't see the problem with http://www.adequacy.net/2005/05/the-child-who-was-a-keyhole-in-the-faxed-atmosphere/ adequacy.net or http://www.popmatters.com/shorttakes/2005_04_24_archive.shtml PopMatters. There is, in my view, {{xt|significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject}}. (The "significant coverage" is that the articles {{xt|address the subject directly in detail}}, with at least 3 of the sources I found which discuss the album itself (Stylus Magazine, PopMatters & adequacy.net) meeting .) I strongly believe that this is a well researched factual article and is of encyclopedic value. The other RSs address related topics, and belong in this article unless someone can propose a more appropriate home for all of this content
— NONE, NONE
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:GNG||WP:NALBUMS||WP:RS (Wikipedia:Notability)