Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cheek to Cheek (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   no consensus. The discussion herein is split between redirection and article retention. Ultimately, there's no consensus here. (Non-administrator closure) NorthAmerica1000 10:09, 30 May 2014 (UTC)

Cheek to Cheek (album)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NALBUMS and WP:CRYSTAL. Album has been pushed several times, with no release date currently set. — Status  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 12:41, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Lady Gaga or Tony Bennett until more information is known. XXSNUGGUMSXX (talk) 14:45, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Tony Bennett for now. — Indian: BIO  · [ ChitChat ] 05:56, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:47, 13 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep. Eh. I was going to close this as redirect, but have you looked at the article? It has multiple reliable sources that discuss multiple aspects of the album (release and pushed back dates, and so on). The major counterargument I could see would be that the sources cover more of their collaboration than the album, but that would mean that their collaboration had the potential of independent notability anyway. Moreover, this would be a merge rather than a redirect because the article's been maintained quite nicely (kudos to whomever). But this belies the point that the article topic does meet the GNG with the current sourcing and doesn't raise any red flags otherwise. Not being released is not a disqualifier, and the linked WP:NALBUMS says so itself. I don't know what points the nom thinks the album fails, but it's going to need more than a vague wave. The proposed merge target, Bennett, could use some merging of basic details regardless of how this AfD closes. czar  ♔  00:07, 20 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Noting these sources that bring the topic past the GNG in direct coverage: czar  ♔  16:47, 22 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 13:30, 22 May 2014 (UTC)


 * Redirect. Per the comments of users IndianBio and XXSNUGGUMSXX. — Tomíca (T2ME) 14:33, 22 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. A merge to either artist wouldn't make sense. A redirect would lose sourced content. If there's nothing more on this in say 6 months we could revisit it but for now probably best to leave it and see how it develops. --Michig (talk) 08:46, 23 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep. A merge to either page would be impractical given their already hefty length. I'd say GNG is met as it stands, but even while the article is small it is likely to expand out, making deleting a redundant step. CR 4 ZE (t &bull; c) 13:41, 28 May 2014 (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.