Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Something Supernatural
I only did a brief search but was able to find a couple of reviews in reliable sources (https://loudwire.com/best-rock-albums-2014/ https://www.nationalrockreview.com/album-reviews/something-supernatural-by-crobot) as well as news stories that discuss the album (https://www.villagevoice.com/2015/07/15/meet-crobot-the-band-that-tattooed-their-times-square-caricatures-on-each-other/ https://www.charlotteobserver.com/entertainment/music-news-reviews/article17220035.html https://www.pennlive.com/entertainment/2014/08/crobot_chameleon_club_1.html). There are also numerous reviews in sources which may or may not be reliable (https://crypticrock.com/crobot-something-supernatural-album-review/ http://www.metal-temple.com/site/catalogues/entry/reviews/cd_3/c_2/crobot-something.htm https://www.legendaryrockinterviews.com/2014/11/25/album-review-crobot-something-supernatural-windup-records/ http://www.themetalforge.com/reviews/4382 https://planetmosh.com/crobot-something-supernatural/ http://getrocked.net/album-review-crobot-something-supernatural/). I'm not particularly familiar with this field/genre so I can't really tell offhand which of those are considered reliable or not; some of them at a glance do ''not'' appear to pass , whereas for others, a search in the /N|RS noticeboard indicates editors have previously suggested they ''could'' be considered reliable for limited purposes, such as in the case of an album review. In any event, even if you threw away all the questionable ones, I think between the  coverage I've found so far in the definitely reliable sources, and the Billboard chart rankings, this subject passes notability standards enough that the article should be kept
— User:Hunter, 16:31, 19 February 2020 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:RS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)