Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fluorescent Adolescent


 * 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 following the addition of sources. This is a non-admin closure. Black Falcon (Talk) 04:45, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

Fluorescent Adolescent

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

unsourced/referenced, the link provided is irrelevant - the existence of this page is entirely based on speculation Oo7565 18:27, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * commont i am doing this afd for another else Djr xi proded this oreginaly i second it thats all to agree with orgianl prod i have no feelings either way i hope thats ok sorry to bother you guys againOo7565 18:31, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep Every other single by the Arctic Monkeys has its own article. Technically I guess it maybe violates WP:CRYSTAL at this stage but only in letter rather in spirit, since the song has already been released in other formats and the label has announced the release will definitely go ahead. These are the current holders of the Mercury Prize and the record holders for fastest selling debut album we're talking about here, not some kids recording in their garage, so it's pretty safe to say the article will expand beyond a stub pretty quickly —  irides centi   (talk to me!)  22:12, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as above.  L.J.Skinner wot 23:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete It has not been verified...If someone can give a link stating it then we can keep it BUT its all speculation at this point. Anyone have a scan or something from a website?Halo475 23:10, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Evening Standard review mentioning that this will be the next single (second para from bottom) —  irides centi   (talk to me!)  23:25, 26 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - reviews are not an adequate reference for an imminent release. Several reviews said "Mardy Bum" was to be the next single after "When the Sun Goes Down", and we all know how that turned out.  Until it is confirmed by the band/record label, the page should not exist.  DJR  ( T ) 01:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - now adequately sourced.   DJR  ( T ) 23:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Strong keep Alex Turner in an interview with MTV said the single was likely to be released next. He went on to say the promo will be filmed this week - promos are rarley filmed for a non-released single. 1 Jonwood1 17:28, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, closest thing we have to a confirmation is one of the band members (I think Cookie) saying it might be the next single Halo475 14:53, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * they filmed a video for Fake Tales of San Francisco and that wasn't a single.... 70.16.92.77 19:03, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - The link i provided when i created the article was For Channel 4's Teletext Music Pages, which often gives details of upcoming singles. It was said by the band that they'd release the song as their next single on Phantom FM radio in Ireland too, when they had a news piece about how Alex Turner's ex-girlfriend stood to make money for co-writing the next Arctic Monkeys single, Fluorescent Adolescent.Furthermore, this Sunday ,29th April, it will chart in the top 50 of the Uk singles chart, being the second highest AM song in the top 200, after Brianstorm. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Cm619 (talk • contribs).


 * Comment - none of the things mentioned by User:Cm619 (or for that matter Jonwood1) are adequate reasons to keep the article. It doesn't matter who said what, when or where - if it cannot be verified by a reliable source then it should not be included in Wikipedia - that is Wikipedia Policy.  The Teletext link does not have any validity as a source if it no longer says what it is referenced as saying.  Saying "the band says this" also has no value per WP:NOR and WP:VERIFY.  The position of the song in the charts is completely irrelevant to the issue.   DJR  ( T ) 23:38, 28 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Very reluctant delete as I am in love with the song but unless it get verfied it should be deleted -- Barryob   Vigeur de dessus  23:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Good sources, great song!--Play Brian Moore 00:19, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep per above Bencey 09:29, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - "Good sources, great song!" - the second part of this is completely irrelevant, and the first part is simply untrue.  DJR  ( T ) 09:08, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Q Magazine & MTV aren't "good sources"? For a music article, they're probably the best you can get —  irides centi   (talk to me!)  14:07, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - agreed, but they weren't there at the time.  DJR  ( T ) 23:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Delete and create again when it has been confirmed if and when it will be released as a single James P Twomey 19:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - found some multiple independent non trivial etc etc for the "next single" claim: Yahoo news (sourced from World Entertainment News and XFM and MTV (the latter says "not set in stone"). Adding them to the article —  irides centi   (talk to me!)  19:13, 30 April 2007 (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.