Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/7/27 (album)


 * 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 Keep – This, quite frankly, is the most ridiculous deletion request I've ever seen. The article was only just created on Friday, and will have more information over the next two months during the buildup to the album release. Billboard Man (talk) 13:06, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

7/27 (album)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

No refs, no categories, a short article. 333-blue 02:41, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. I'm unfamiliar with this group's music, but the announcement of this album's release is receiving mainstream media coverage (see for various examples), and their last full album reached the top 10 on the Billboard 200 (see http://www.billboard.com/artist/5665538/fifth-harmony/chart?f=305 for information) just last year. The news coverage already received appears to satisfy WP:NALBUMS. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 02:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as references have been added. The article had just been created (20 minutes before AFD) and coverage already existed in Google News, so this probably shouldn't have been nominated for deletion. Peter James (talk) 09:39, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep – I've heard this group on the radio a lot and if that is true, then this album has importance on Wikipedia. 2601:8C:4001:DCF4:4DB7:8078:579D:9A72 (talk) 14:16, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Also I give this a speed prodecural close because there now are sources. 73.178.42.174 (talk) 17:28, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep,, I agree with , please read WP:BEFORE the next time you consider taking a 19-minute old article to AfD. The reasons you gave were also invalid, an article having no categories and being short are now viable reasons for deletion? Absurd.  Azealia 911  talk  22:48, 27 February 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.