Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Some Kind of Trouble (2nd nomination)


 * 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. -- Cirt (talk) 00:46, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

Some Kind of Trouble
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Already deleted per WP:CRYSTAL in last AFD; some fanboy created it only a day later. Album still fails WP:NALBUMS with absolutely no verifiable info besides the title; there were links to fansites, Amazon and YouTube, which I removed. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 02:49, 5 October 2010 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:10, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I don't think "fanboy" is a term that assumes good faith, but I could be wrong. Cullen328 (talk) 05:01, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:13, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per Crystal Ball (joking). But mainly common sense, this is Blunt, that song which is a single off of this album, that made it through AfD... is on Billboard plus on Itunes Charts worldwide (see Stay the Night), has cover, title, lead single, some news, well, enough that it certainly confirms it exists, and that people are talking about it. I understand the rules, but I also understand wasting time, and this AfD is just that, unfortunately, I have spent several minutes typing this up and looking at charts, so... touché, TenPound. Also, I know that we cannot let the fanboys run the show, I know our processes should not go ignored by blunt fanboy desires, but unless this is speedily deleted, I assure you that by the time this AfD closes, regardless of how people voted in the beginning, be it a majority of deletes, there will be more information and it won't get deleted... so act quickly. - Theornamentalist (talk) 20:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Keep It's not that the article is particularly notable yet, but I see no reason to doubt the verity of the likely release date and album title unless the sources, which had been deleted, are shown to be otherwise inaccurate. It may as well be kept for now and modified on its release to cater for any alterations, as it will doubtless reappear at some point down the line anyway. (AbrahamCat (talk) 00:31, 12 October 2010 (UTC))
 * Speedy Keep. Both other James Blunt studio albums are notable enough for articles, so it hard to imagine this one will not be. Perhaps, by the letter of the guidelines it is not currently notable enough, but how is it helpful to delete it now just to prove a point, when it will be recreated with greater notability in no time at all? -- K orr u ski Talk 11:00, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NALBUMS Blunt's certainly a notable artist, album officially confirmed on his and his label's websites. In addition, the page has a full tracklist, with valid reference. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bod720 (talk • contribs) 17:01, 13 October 2010 (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.