Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/All-4-One Has Left the Building

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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. I interpret the comments by !voters below the weblinks as reaffirmation of their positions, so the result is unanimously to delete.Chaser - T 20:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] All-4-One Has Left the Building

All-4-One Has Left the Building (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Alleges to be an unreleased album, I can't find anything even close to verifiable on this, not even any blogs or music sites. Appears to be a hoax, but I can't tell for certain, so I'm bringing it here. badlydrawnjeff talk 18:24, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Comment - There is still the issue of notability. The album was not released, so we can't talk about popularity, sales figures, or anything else that would contribute to an encyclopedic discussion of this album. ◄Zahakiel► 19:52, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • If the album can be verified to have been in existence at some point, notability no longer becomes an issue given the artist. If it wasn't something that I could verify, I would have never brought it here. --badlydrawnjeff talk 20:04, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm sure you checked, I do the same thing. I think in the case of it being verified, I would still only be in favor of a merge to the group's entry; I don't really think unreleased albums should get separate articles unless there's a strong reason for that, like a controversial reason why it wasn't released. ◄Zahakiel► 20:21, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Even if we assume this was an album officially considered for release, it's tough to determine where the bar of inclusion lies with unreleased material, as they tend to not get the reviews and coverage that released albums get. Some of them do achieve a sort of legendary status, as in the Beach Boys' Smile album and Guns 'N' Roses' Chinese Democracy. I notice Prince's Camille and Space's Love You More than Football have articles, while Pet Shop Boys' Relentless, for example, does not. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 20:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Agreed, although it's interesting to note that neither of those two that do have entries cite any sources or make any claims of notability either. The difficulty in establishing these two criteria (verifiability and notability) for the inclusion of unreleased/unpublished material does, I would have to say, make perfect sense. In the case of the AfD here, other bad articles don't justify the presence of this one :) ◄Zahakiel► 21:17, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete - the keyword is "may never be released". Therefore: IF it ever gets released, this article can be resubmitted. HagenUK 21:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment The proper term is "keep" not Do Not Delete Ron Ritzman 00:28, 16 March 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.