Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Years (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.  MBisanz  talk 01:17, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Years (Album)

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

Was nominated for speedy deletion by another user, and contested. The individual and their bands have articles, however I'm not certain as to whether the album is notable - yet or at any point - therefore I've brought it to AFD. Esteffect (talk) 00:18, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, fails notability per WP:MUSIC & WP:CRYSTAL. Speedy not possible due to there being an artists article. Searching pulls up no reliable, third-party, sources. The mention in the reference is, "He’s calling it Years. Can’t announce too much about that but there are plans for it to be released this year. That’s it". Not exactly significant coverage as called for in WP:MUSIC#Albums. Nothing to merge into the artists page due to the lack of WP:RS.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 02:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per WP:NALBUMS In general, if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles on Wikipedia. This is a case of a walled garden between the band, the singer and this album, but the guideline is clear. I would start by questioning the notability of the artist as a standalone entity (rather than as part of the band). If the artist goes, the album is one quick WP:CSD away. As usual, I note my protest that WP:MUSIC and attendant guidelines have loopholes the size of Nevada. § FreeRangeFrog 04:36, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - Obviously my argument would be far more convincing if the album had been actually released, a fact which I managed to miss. § FreeRangeFrog 16:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete per Esradekan. FreeRangeFrog overlooked a particularly important part of that guideline. It said "may have sufficient notability". There's no point in questioning the topic's notability when there's too little verifiable information to build an article with. - Mgm|(talk) 09:04, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete, chiming in with Esradekan. Drmies (talk) 21:24, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I have added the upcoming release page from the official Arts & Crafts site. Hopefully this will bring this to an end. —Preceding unsigned comment added by AandC (talk • contribs) 19:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Where does all the OR in the article come from? Without that, it's nothing but a tracklist by an artist who is barely notable as it is (only one single reference for his article, and that a passing mention in an interview with someone else about a hypothetical project on a blog which I doubt is much of an WP:RS). Drmies (talk) 22:47, 4 March 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.