Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Untitled My Chemical Romance 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   delete. Secret account 22:37, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Untitled My Chemical Romance album

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

WP:HAMMER, No official tracklist, name, or release date. > RUL3R >trolling >vandalism  23:16, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete. Per nom and WP:NOT A CRYSTAL BALL. WildHorsesPulled (talk) 23:22, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:HAMMER, nothing's confirmed yet. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 00:43, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note. This album was the subject of a previous Afd which resulted in 'no consensus' and 'rename'. The discussion can be found at Articles for deletion/For the Sins.... J04n(talk page) 15:33, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No extensive coverage that gives cause for an article right now. No tracklist, title, or release date. It's too soon. talking  birds  20:45, 28 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete Could not find reliable sources to confirm definitively, therefore fails WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NALBUMS. Narthring (talk  • contribs) 04:22, 29 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge I don't see a problem with merging the information in this article with the band's main article.  The band's article already has a section for the upcoming album.  Assuming the band continues working on the project when it meets WP:NALBUMS (I believe it will in the near future) then an article for the album itself will be in order.  Narthring (talk  • contribs) 20:09, 2 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: it's WP:HAMMERTIME. Notable band, not-yet-notable album.   Cocytus   [»talk«]  02:18, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Adequate coverage already exists. At the very least it should be merged into the band's article. It's a little shocking that nobody else in this discussion has considered that option.--Michig (talk) 17:27, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
 * A link to the adequate coverage would help change my opinion and allow it to be verified. Narthring (talk  • contribs) 16:28, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Seven sources are already linked in the article. We know that this has been recorded and has already received plenty of coverage. Why would this not at least be merged into the band article?--Michig (talk) 16:48, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
 * Existence ≠ Notability. > RUL3R >trolling >vandalism  18:11, 2 November 2009 (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.