Talk:Slipknot Demo/GA3

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

This nomination is being failed for the following reasons:

There have been no substantial changes to the article since the last failed GAN – apparently there is no more information available at this time?
After reading the article I know almost nothing about the demo itself, only how it was important to the band's career. A good article should tell me about the writing/recording process of the demo, and what reliable reviewers have said about it. How do later versions of the songs differ from these? And was the demo ever released to the public?
The article only goes a sentence or so beyond what's already included at Slipknot (band), and the extra info easily could be included there without it being called extraneous, so why is this article necessary in the first place? That the demo has been covered in a couple of books (which seems to be the rationale for keeping the article according to the AfDs) hardly means a separate page is warranted. Note that the notability criteria only says "...[demos] may be notable if they have significant independent coverage in reliable sources". (Emphasis mine) I can find hundreds of articles about Barack Obama's (not) wearing a flag pin, but that doesn't mean it needs its own article. (I'm sure we can agree that the one paragraph summary at Barack Obama presidential primary campaign, 2008 is all that's necessary.)