Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unreleased Material by Britney Spears 2


 * 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 Delete -- JForget  00:20, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Unreleased Material by Britney Spears
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

2nd nomination, first nomination resulted in no consensus due to no reason given by the opening editor. AfD was attempted to be reopened by User:KeeperOTD with this argument "I am adding to the original request for deletion by providing justification. It is a list which is violation of Wikipedia policy, does not explain why it is notable or merits inclusion into Wikipedia, and is not up to Wikipedia standards of what an encyclopedic entry should be. KeeperOTD (talk) 17:47, 12 March 2008 (UTC)" I have no comment at this time. Torchwood Who? (talk) 13:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.   — Littleteddy (roar!) 13:35, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.   — Littleteddy (roar!) 13:35, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.   — Littleteddy (roar!) 13:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Actors and actresses-related deletion discussions.   — Littleteddy (roar!) 13:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Utterly non-encyclopedic, full of original research and synthesis. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:36, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong delete as being full of original research and possibly unverifiable info. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells•Otter chirps) 14:16, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - Entirely non-encyclopedic. --AndrewHowse (talk) 16:10, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete no reliable sources, is pretty much original research all the way through Doc StrangeMailbox Orbitting Black Hole Strange Frequencies 17:48, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete The article is entirely composed of rumors, speculation and predictions. No encyclopedic content seems apparent here. Kesh (talk) 18:29, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete After reading the arguments presented I've settled to the side of delete. I see shades of violations in WP:CRYSTAL WP:OR and WP:RS presented here.--Torchwood Who? (talk) 18:37, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Articles for deletion/Britney Spears bootlegs. Also some of the info can be proven false.--Hiltonhampton (talk) 00:03, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete merely a list of unverified rumours and original research. --Angelo (talk) 23:19, 15 March 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.