Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Being Funny in a Foreign Language


 * 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. (non-admin closure) ASTIG️🙃  (ICE-T • ICE CUBE) 22:15, 16 July 2022 (UTC)

Being Funny in a Foreign Language

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

For an unreleased album to be notable, per WP:CRYSTALBALL, it should be notable even if it is not released. (This is because albums are regularly delayed/cancelled, so are not "almost certain to take place".)

The existence of a minimal amount of routine information is not suited to a standalone article, but to incorporation in the existing article on the band—or, in the article "Part of the Band", which is notable due to a significant number of in-depth reviews and analyses. Mostly unsourced speculation about the album details, such as claimed track lengths, and a track listing that has been published by the band but will be subject to change, are not solid grounds for an article.

The current sourcing is: two primary sources (YouTube videos); three routine NME sources giving the very little publicly available information about the album; two sources where notability is conferred on "Part of the Band" but not inherited to the album.

Attempts to redirect have been quashed through edit warring by a recreating user that has not engaged in discussion yet. — Bilorv ( talk ) 23:26, 9 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. — Bilorv ( talk ) 23:26, 9 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep, this a notable topic, but likely instead needs REFIMPROVE. Rylesbourne (talk) 02:12, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * which sources exist that contribute to notability and are not in the article? — Bilorv ( talk ) 07:05, 10 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep. Notable topic by a notable artist. agreed, the article needs more diverse sourcing material. There is enough outside of NME waiting to be incorporated, e.g. on DIY, Uproxx, Variety, Line of Best Fit, Music Feeds and more. Also, the article will develop with time as more gets revealed and released. Lk95 (talk) 08:48, 10 July 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not saying that the article will not be notable, but it is not notable today. There is nothing to incorporate from each of those sources as the little speculative detail that has been announced is already in the article. — Bilorv ( talk ) 09:52, 10 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep - I'm not a fan of articles for future albums that people create as soon as said albums are announced, because patience is a virtue. But this album is for real, and the article is not a WP:CRYSTALBALL violation because the album's release date and track list have been confirmed, and the upcoming release is getting reliable media coverage because of the band's popularity. (Especially the NME article, and here are some more:, , , .) Since this article is here, regardless of maybe being a bit too early, deleting it serves little purpose except creating more work for Admins, because someone will re-create it and then it will have to be re-deleted again and again until the release date in October. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 15:03, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Also, nobody (including me, forgetfully) has yet mentioned the WP:FUTUREALBUM guideline, which allows for reliable sources that confirm the release date and other essential info about the album. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 15:58, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the pointer to WP:FUTUREALBUM, which I'm sure I thought about but somehow overlooked. It says: In a few special cases, an unreleased album may qualify for an article if there is sufficient verifiable and properly referenced information about it ... generally, an album should not have an independent article until its title, track listing and release date have all been publicly confirmed by the artist or their record label. The title, track listing and release date have been given. — Bilorv ( talk ) 16:50, 11 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep per sources provided by LK95 and Doomsdayer. They provide enough significant coverage to meet the GNG. There's no CRYSTAL issues remaining. Sergecross73   msg me  19:16, 11 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep as per above Kazanstyle (talk) 11:10, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep especially because new UK Rolling Stone cover provides more information about the article, which should help expand the article beyond a stub. Red 05 (talk) 22:41, 13 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep, I believe the album is legit. Everything related to the album has been confirmed and I believe it has gained attention. Not to mention, it is from a very well known band. I will say this, deleting this will serve no purpose and it does mean requiring more work and re-creating it from scratch. I suggested keeping it and as usual, expanding it along the way. 20chances (talk) 00:21, 14 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 01:30, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Please look up this. -The Gnome (talk) 10:53, 15 July 2022 (UTC)
 * @Another Believer Can you explain the reason for your vote? SBKSPP (talk) 01:21, 16 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Release date, track listing, etc, that's enough for me, plus the page would just be recreated again in the very near future if deleted. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 02:40, 16 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets WP:FUTUREALBUM with sources presented above. They're reliable and in-depth enough IMV. SBKSPP (talk) 01:21, 16 July 2022 (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.