Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Enslaved (Soulfly 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. Crystal ball guidelines not violated here given coverage of announced album by notable band. Drmies (talk) 15:17, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Enslaved (Soulfly album)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

contested prod. non notable unreleased album. Albums do not inherit band's notability. All refs are to label's site. Gaijin42 (talk) 19:42, 7 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete: Album hasn't even been released yet, so there can be no third-party coverage about it yet. Fails all notabilty requirements. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 20:48, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete as premature. Once the album is closer to release, an article may be appropriate - provided that it has the required sourcing. See also WP:CRYSTAL. UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 21:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:46, 8 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. --Legis (talk - contribs) 07:44, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I know nothing about this band, so I have no bias. But it is an upcoming album that has been announced. It does have references and seems to be on the right track. Could use better formatting, but perhaps when more information comes about. --Fightingirish (talk) 13:32, 9 December 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge This album has been announced by ALL of the following references, and is being released by a notable band and a notable record company.
 * http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/news/Soulfly-To-Release-New-Album-In-March-23844.aspx/?eml=20111209/soulfly/world/newsletter/new-album/news-story
 * http://maytherockbewithyou.com/mtrbwy/2011/12/soulfly-to-release-eighth-album-enslaved-in-2012/
 * http://www.metalinjection.net/contact-us
 * http://www.smnnews.com/2011/12/06/soulfly-enslaved-release-date-set/
 * http://loudwire.com/soulfly-celebrate-15-years-enslaved-album/
 * http://www.bloody-disgusting.com/news/music/2361
 * http://www.metalstorm.net/events/news_comments.php?news_id=15275
 * http://www.artistdirect.com/nad/misc/aboutus/0,,,00.html
 * http://www.radiorockcafe.com/index.php/important-information/tune-in.html
 * http://www.metalhammer.co.uk/news/soulfly-announce-album-titlerelease-date/
 * http://www.metalunderground.com/news/details.cfm?newsid=74705

Therefore, the album has "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", which meets WP:GNG.--Jax 0677 (talk) 17:17, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Roadrunner is the label, that one def does not count. Several of those are just 1 line announcements. Several more are the exact same text (reprinted press release) Gaijin42 (talk) 23:52, 10 December 2011 (UTC)


 * These sources merely confirm that the album doesn't exist yet. As of three days ago, the playlist was still "tentative", and the planned release date is three months in the future. Notices of future release of an as-yet non-existant album do little to establish notability, especially if they are based on press-release information from the artists' label. Dominus Vobisdu (talk) 11:30, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment: According to WP:Music,


 * "Unreleased material (including demos, mixtapes, bootlegs, promo-only recordings) is only notable if it has significant independent coverage in reliable sources.


 * In a few special cases, an unreleased album may qualify for an article if there is sufficient verifiable and properly referenced information about it—for example, Guns 'n Roses' 2008 album Chinese Democracy had an article as early as 2004. However, this only applies to a very small number of exceptionally high-profile projects — 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."


 * At this point, the band knows what the songs will be, but simply must order the songs properly. At a minimum, the material should be merged into the Soulfly and/or Soulfly discography articles, if not kept as is.--Jax 0677 (talk) 17:17, 11 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep – Actually, three of the refs in this article are from Blabbermouth.net, a news website owned by Roadrunner Records. The news site doesn't give any special bias toward Roadrunner artists, and it's generally considered a reliable source of information. The featured articles Vol. 3: (The Subliminal Verses) and Slayer both use the site as a reliable source of information among many other articles. The reason why it was suggested for the track listing to been officially confirmed for a future album was to avoid a collection of possible songs from generally unreliable sources such as YouTube videos or fan blogs—a situation which can sometimes plague a future album article. So even though the ordering of the songs is unknown, the full set of tracks is known and officially confirmed by means other than YouTube and fan blogs. That, in combination with the other confirmed details, one could easily write a start class album article with verifiable information for Enslaved. Fezmar9 (talk) 20:40, 15 December 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment - According to the statement at the bottom of http://www.roadrunnerrecords.com/blabbermouth.net/:


 * "BLABBERMOUTH.NET is run and operated independently of Roadrunner Records. The accuracy of the information contained herein is neither confirmed nor guaranteed by Roadrunner Records, and the views and opinions of authors expressed on these pages do not necessarily state or reflect those of Roadrunner Records or its employees".


 * But I do agree with keeping this discography. This discussion has now been open for more than one week with no disposition.--Jax 0677 (talk) 02:07, 16 December 2011 (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.