Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Untitled X Japan 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 no consensus. No prejudice against speedy renomination per low participation. North America1000 05:49, 27 August 2021 (UTC)

Untitled X Japan album

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Deceptively lengthy article about an album that may not ever be released. The fact that it has no title and no confirmed release date make this an automatic violation of WP:CRYSTAL and WP:HAMMER. Most of the article is actually a general history of the band during the 13+ years that they were supposedly working on the album, and factoids on aborted recording sessions and other mishaps can be described at the band's article. Sources indicate that the band has been recording throughout the period, but nobody has any confirmation on when or even IF such an album will ever be released. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 21:36, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 21:36, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 21:36, 5 August 2021 (UTC)
 * The article shows that there have been several officially announced release dates for the album, but that they have been missed. The fact that they've been missed, and any speculation that it may never be released, are not reasons to delete. This is evident by the roughly 120 articles in Category:Unreleased albums (which includes other untitled albums) and the very existence of said category. Your summary that "Most of the article is actually a general history of the band during the 13+ years that they were supposedly working on the album", not only doesn't make sense since background on the making of albums is expected, but is also a large exaggeration. It has details about its recording, themes behind the songwriting, and details on the several songs that have already been released from said album, which is confirmed to have been completed i.e. "it exists." Thus the article is "well documented", passing #1 at WP:CRYSTAL. So really your argument is solely that the whole album doesn't currently have a release date or a title, which doesn't hold up with Category:Unreleased albums. Xfansd (talk) 22:20, 5 August 2021 (UTC) — Note to closing admin: Xfansd (talk • contribs) is the creator of the page that is the subject of this AfD.
 * Just because the category has albums in it, that does not mean that none of them could be recommended for deletion, nor do any of them support each other's existence. The quantity is deceptive because the category is based on metadata behind articles and not their quality or current status. A whole bunch of the entries in the category have been redirected to the artist due to poor notability (e.g. Inner Heat, 14 (Charli XCX album), Who's for Tennis?, Venom (Chamillionaire album), etc.), and some are repeats of each other (e.g. Unreleased third studio album (Charli XCX), XCX World). Also, saying that this X Japan album should stay because there are articles on other unreleased albums falls afoul of WP:OTHERSTUFF. I concede that the X Japan album has a lot of sources but I believe they are too vague on the album's future reality. That is worth arguing about, in terms of notability, if anyone else chimes in. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 15:12, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * I am aware that articles in Category:Unreleased albums do not transfer any notability over to Untitled X Japan album and was definitely not implying that they are all quality articles. I mentioned it because your whole nomination was based on the album not having been released. Which sources are too vague? Any "future reality," be it one where the album is never released or one where it is released in a form vastly different from what the article currently says, is irrelevant. We have reliable sources reporting on the making of and the material set to be included on their "new"/"sixth" studio album, making an article about that album notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. If the album is released and some of the songs originally reported to be on it by those sources are not included, those original reports will still be included in any future article. You can't just casually claim all 41 sources are "too vague" and therefore the article should be deleted for failing notability. Xfansd (talk) 16:58, 6 August 2021 (UTC)
 * We are working in a text-only medium so nuances are falling through the cracks for both of us. I'll just try to wrap up my own stance with this: "future reality" = confirmed release date, confirmed title, confirmed track list. I will not fight any community consensus on such matters, because I don't have to look at that article ever again. Just giving my impressions on WP policy. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 17:25, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  23:51, 12 August 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 23:55, 19 August 2021 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.