Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Back to Tennessee (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 per WP:WHATEVER… I mean WP:SNOW. Non-admin closure. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 21:34, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Back to Tennessee (album)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:CRYSTAL. Very little verifiable info yet, track listing can't be confirmed outside of retail sites such as Amazon. Given Lyric Street's penchant for constantly delaying album releases (just ask Sarah Buxton), and the poor performance of its leadoff single, there is more than a slight chance that this album could end up unreleased, much like Jo Dee Messina's Unmistakable. Either way, there are no sources to verify any of the information, and the Amazon description is not by a professional review and doesn't belong. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 04:54, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - appears to have a lot of info regarding the album present. As an added note, I doubt it will be unreleased, TenLbHammer, Cyrus has put out plenty of albums with far more underperforming songs -- ie: Wanna Be Your Joe and Trail of Tears CloversMallRat (talk) 05:05, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Those labels are more tolerant tho. Lyric Street is pretty strict. Josh Gracin led off his second album with a Top 20 hit and it still took him forever and a day to get the album out. Furthermore, if there's a "lot of info" where is it? CMT, GAC, etc. had nothing that amounted to anything more than "it will be released March 2009, blah blah blah yakkidy smakkidy". Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 05:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It's on the album page CloversMallRat (talk) 07:35, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The Amazon source? I already said that's not useful. WP:ALBUM says you can't use Amazon. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 15:19, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:ALBUM says you can use Amazon as a source of album art and that you can't use it as a source of reviews. That is the only mention I could find there.--NrDg 19:59, 14 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep - it only just over a month until its release date and redirecting or deleting would just be a waste of time. I think its fine. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 16:10, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak keep for now - It passes WP:CRYSTAL but does not now meet the requirements of WP:NALBUMS. It has coverage, at least a mention at Amazon - Amazon is WP:RS for existence, track listings, planned release dates; but not reviews. The coverage is not "significant" though. However I lean towards keep as I have strong expectations that significant coverage for an album by a notable artist WILL happen and be enough to establish notability. Article is a work in progress and a reasonable expectation that notably will soon be established is, in my judgment, justification for a keep. Article has been tagged with and deletion should be reconsidered if a reasonable amount of time has passed without "significant coverage in independent sources" shown.--NrDg 18:50, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Only just over a month until its release date, like Speed of Light. Dennissell (talk) 13:01, 16 February 2009 (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.