Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nationalgeographic

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. I'll editorially redirect this to National Geographic as a possible misspelling. Sandstein 09:47, 1 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nationalgeographic

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to fail WP:NALBUMS. Tagged as unreferenced since 2006. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 05:04, 17 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:58, 18 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Rcsprinter₁₂₃ (rap) @ 21:01, 23 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete normally I'd suggest a merge and redirect to Layourbattleaxedown, but that album appears to lack notability as well, which makes me wonder if The Concretes (1995–present) are notable at all. You wouldn't know it from their Wikipedia article. This EP fails WP:Music. After deletion, pointing this to National Geographic Society as a misspelling might be a good idea. --Bejnar (talk) 14:47, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fully agree with what Bejnar says. Don't look notable. Daniel298289 (talk) 22:44, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.