Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Progfest '94 (album)
The sources in the article are reliable" -- seriously??  The first one is a primary source.  The second is a track listing, and I am curious upon what basis "sobaworld.co.kr" meets . The third is six sentences long (and I am curious upon what basis "expose.org" meets ).  The fourth does not mention the subject at all.  Neither does the ''Los Angeles Times'' piece listed as an external link in the article. Claiming that these sources provide the |significant coverage ''to the subject'' that the GNG requires is, at best, fishing.  Fails the GNG and WP:ALBUM.And that being said, there's long been a notion held by some that if there's some excuse for there not to be reliable sources on a subject (pre-Internet age, say), the provisions of  and the GNG are waived.  This curious notion is not supported by any Wikipedia policy or guideline
— [[User talk:Ravenswing|''' '' Ravenswing '' ''' ]], 01:21, 16 August 2020 (UTC)
Stance: delete
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:RS||WP:SIGCOV||WP:V (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)