Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In The Court Of The Crimson Queen


 * 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   Change to redirect. Tim Vickers (talk) 20:00, 15 June 2008 (UTC)

In The Court Of The Crimson Queen

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

This is all speculations and conjecture, and even those are not cited. Also, wp:crystal -- Mblumber (talk) 13:40, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree, it's just far too much unsourced speculation Ged UK (talk) 13:59, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

how would you like me to source and reference it? I manage all of Toyah's official webspaces... and prepare copy for them all. Please refer to www.toyahwillcox.com for substanitation. CA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Decaytreasure (talk • contribs) 14:12, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * — Decaytreasure (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * What is needed are independent sources. Since you are webmaster of the only source cited in the article, the article is currently original research. Independent coverage is needed to demonstrate the verifiability and notability of the subject. —C.Fred (talk) 14:47, 7 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - As it stands right now. However, with the addition of reliable sources, (that is, independent, third-party sources), this article would be vastly improved. At the moment, a violation of WP:CRYSTAL. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tnxman307 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete with permissive recreation . The article fails the verifiability guideline. There are no secondary reliable sources cited. (Toyah's website is a primary source.) Further, if the original editor is the webmaster of the Toyah website, then this strays into the realm of conflict of interest and original research. The article is not written as a press vehicle, but nor should it rely solely on contributions from the artist's press handlers. —C.Fred (talk) 14:41, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Edited my !vote: at such time as reliable independent sources on the album are available (e.g., release date, track list, multiple reviews in major magazines), the article may be recreated without need for a deletion review. —C.Fred (talk) 16:53, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete then Redirect to the artist. We should probably make a "nth studio album" redirect for every musician popular with the teeny-boppers. Fee Fi Foe Fum (talk) 23:53, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. Yeah - there seem to be plenty of secondary sources confirming the album out there on the internets. There's certainly no WP:CRYSTAL in terms of the fact that there will be an album of this title, though (hell, even The Telegraph]'s mentioned it! The article does need any speculation trimmed and references added to the rest, though (perhaps someone who - unlike me - has broadband, can find something on this BBC interview]?) Oh, and since when has Toyah been "a musician popular with the teeny-boppers"? Fee Fi, you need to get out more! Grutness...wha?  02:14, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * The BBC interview seemed to be more about Pantomime and Christmas lights and Hell's Angels doing stage security. I didn't hear any discussion of the new album(s). —C.Fred (talk) 17:00, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.   -- the wub  "?!"  14:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I added an external link (to telegraph online) to substantiate the release and title of the album as opposed to merely inlcuding an inappropriate external link. I cannot do right from wrong!! CA. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/03/28/cmfame28.xml&page=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Decaytreasure (talk • contribs) 16:36, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * It would help to avoid multiple edit conflicts if you remember to sign your posts. -- Rodhull andemu  16:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep Toyah Willcox is a notable artist and therefore this album, when it appears, will be notable per WP:MUSIC. Sure, the article should have the tag but it appears that WP:RS are available for it already and coverage will increase. And, being in my mid-50s, no way am I a "teenybopper", nor was I ever. -- Rodhull  andemu  16:38, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * I'm not opposed to recreation of the article when sources are available. Right now, all that's been independently verified is that the album is scheduled to be released later this year. Incidentally, I just gave this album the Amazon test, and the only thing listed for pre-order right now is Good Morning Universe - The Very Best Of Toyah, scheduled for release on 30 June. —C.Fred (talk) 16:46, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Further, it seems to fail WP:MUSIC right now: "Articles and information about albums with confirmed release dates in the near future must be confirmed by reliable sources and should use the future-album tag." (emphasis added) The article does not mention any release date yet. —C.Fred (talk) 16:50, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

DecayTreasure: Well here in lies an issue which needs to be thought of by wikipedia. Putting osmething in amazon and it not being scheduled release is not the be al and end all. artists are now using different methods of distribution and ways of releasing music... many of which don't include standard record shops or online vendors. (download, magazine/newspaper giveaways, PWYC (pay what you can). There's currently no confirmation of formats for the album release. Just because Amazon doesn't provide a listing doesn't mean that something isn't going to be released or has been released. I know that in time proof will appear which vindicates the listing.. I guess its just hanging on til then. CA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Decaytreasure (talk • contribs) 19:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Toyah Willcox for now. Currently fails the WP:MUSIC notability guideline but with no prejudice to recreating the article once it can meet the notability guideline. Davewild (talk) 18:43, 15 June 2008 (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.