Talk:Idioblast (album)

	This redirect was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This redirect was accepted on 7 October 2012 by reviewer MatthewVanitas (talk · contribs).

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest and neutral point of view.

Limbotoy (talk · contribs) This user has not edited the article. This user has been banned and may therefore be reverted on sight.
Daniellasuttoni (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has been banned and may therefore be reverted on sight.
Fekner (talk · contribs) This user has contributed to the article. This user has been banned and may therefore be reverted on sight.
Incantation (talk · contribs) This user has not edited the article. This user has been banned and may therefore be reverted on sight.

COI by article subject[edit]

I received a convincing email from another user, via the Wikipedia "email this user" function, that said the following: "I've worked with Wikipedia editors on both the John Fekner https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fekner and John Fekner City Squad Idioblast https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idioblast_(album)". it was signed by the article subject, so there is likely strong COI here. I have tagged the article for COI. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:42, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge proposal[edit]

I think it makes sense to merge this with John Fekner. The album is self-published, fringe type of thing that is more of an artwork than an album. On the one hand it seems to fail WP:NALBUM, but on the other hand it is in the collection of the MOMA. So it is a standalone artwork in a museum collection, but it does not appear to have garnered much press in that area. It doesn't pass notability for a standalone artwork. I see at most two or three sources, so I think it makes sense to trim this and merge it to John Fekner. A final note: I received an email from another user claiming to be John Fekner, and admitting that they had worked on the article diligently. There's also a post at COIN about this. So, promotional.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:57, 4 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd say go for it. I'm not really good at making the layout look good after they're fused together, so I'll let someone else do it. Graywalls (talk) 09:16, 9 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ThatMontrealIP: Graywalls (talk) 06:27, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'll leave it for someone uninvolved to do...ThatMontrealIP (talk) 06:38, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 07:15, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]