Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/You Don't Have to Worry...


 * 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 per WP:CRYSTAL. However, no objections to recreation when the album is actually released. --Tone 12:35, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

You Don't Have to Worry...
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Shoots self in foot with the first line - basically speculation due to the viral marketing (apart from the release of NitA) Will (talk) 19:25, 26 December 2007 (UTC) I suggest we merge Panic! at the Disco's 2007-2008 New Album section (Most of which I wrote and referenced) with the article in question. We would have an adequate amount of information and references to satisfy the needs of wikipedian guidelines and remove the notion of crystal ballery. Knight Whitefire (talk) 06:59, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - WP:CRYSTAL; besides, an album which isn't even out yet deserves a rebuttal presumption of non-notability. -- Orange Mike  |  Talk  19:49, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:CRYSTAL --Mhking (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * KeepIt shouldn't be deleted. There has been notable, citeable information coming these past weeks and there's still more to come. Yeah, the title is speculated, but that's about it. Change it to an "Untitled 08" or something of that sort if that speculation is really what's buggingThedarkchao93 (talk) 20:57, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per Wikipedia is not a crystal ball.IslaamMaged126 (talk) 22:21, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete Beyond crystal ballery, outright non-encyclopedic speculation. Mr Senseless (talk) 23:27, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Oh, the round, shiny sphereness of it all! Delete. Soxred93 has a boring sig 23:55, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as it is just a rumor and does not exist yet..... -RiverHockey (talk) 00:15, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep This is not rumored, Panic! has stated the date of the album and songs from this album have been in circulation since August, 2007. However the name of the album is pure speculation, but just because the name is speculative doasn't mean the facts about the album aren't true. Knight Whitefire (talk) 01:32, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Suggest changing the title of the article to Untitled Panic! at the Disco album or something to that effect. The album is definitely coming on a set date, as shown in the references.  At this point, I'd say there is enough information to warrant keeping the article, and we all know more information will be available soon, so deleting it now only to recreate it in the near future seems pointless.  Also, the article has 2 legit references (I'm not counting the band's site or the Youtube link), which is 2 more than most album pages have.  Tdogg241 (talk) 06:05, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't care about the title as long as the article stays around... the title is not You Don't Have to Worry. This article does contain speculation, but then again, so do many other articles. If all unsourced trivia is removed, especially the parts about the website, then this article would be great to have around. The "Second album" section of the P!atD page should be merged with this article. JazzlineB (talk) 22:55, 27 December 2007 (UTC)


 * KeepIt will only have to be recreated when more details come out - it's pointless to delete only to have it remade in a few weeks. Greg James (talk) 23:31, 27 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - per WP:CRYSTAL Cumulus Clouds (talk) 07:48, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree wtih Greg, and that new information is constantly coming to light. Although the information here is incomplete and some of it yet to be confirmed, I've yet to see any false information. I don't think the "Second Album" information of the P!ATD page should be merged btw, I believe that information should be shortened, rewritten to two or threes paragraphs, then possibly merged. Venyx (talk) 10:03, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge with the "second" article. Bearian (talk) 19:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Hmm. This one's kind of tough. On the one hand the album totally exists, and will be out relatively soon; on the other, the article is basically crystal ballery. Seeing the reliable sources, I'd say keep, but remove all unsourced statements. However, this brings us to very few relevant statements, and we are left without a title. Unless we can find a concrete source that the album will be released under that name, or any other name for that matter, I'm going for delete, but keep updating the section in the band's page. That section is the first step to an acceptable article. J- ſtan ContribsUser page 05:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Crystalline album. We need to get more brutal with this stuff ... it takes a lot of time to verify all of these future album pieces, and it would be nicer if we could just speedy them until the actual release date.Kww (talk) 03:26, 31 December 2007 (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.