Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Forthcoming Kylie Album
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.Blnguyen | BLabberiNg 02:05, 23 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Forthcoming Kylie Album
Contains no verifiable sources and horribly titled Рэдхот 17:08, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. This album doesn't even have a title yet. It hasn't been confirmed. The article itself seems to be speculation and original research: the author seems to have collected all of Kylie's singles that do not appear on other albums and put them together as a possible track listing. When the album is confirmed and/or released, it can have an article, but right now it simply doesn't merit one by Wikipedia standards and guidelines. Srose (talk) 17:58, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Red Blooded Delete as 100% speculation. Ac@osr 20:09, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete If the album hasn't even been given a working title, I can't see it being solid enough to pass WP is not a crystal ball. --- The Bethling(Talk) 22:19, 17 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per the bleeding obvious. Resolute 01:05, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete. I have read about the track that the Scissor Sisters have written for Kylie and a News Limited article attached indicates that she has been recording see [1]. However, it is premature to have a standalone article on an album until we have a name and other details. For now, a mention on the Kylie Minogue album that she is recording an album should be sufficient. Capitalistroadster 06:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletions. -- Capitalistroadster 06:01, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete -- Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. -- Longhair\talk 06:30, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Keep. We have a verifiable source, we know it's happening, so it doesn't fall under the crystal ball clause. Article can be easily moved once a title comes out. --badlydrawnjeff talk 11:02, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. Errr, Jeff, where exactly is this verifiable source? I don't see any sources listed in the article. Srose (talk) 18:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's linked above. --badlydrawnjeff talk 18:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- That source states: No one's in a rush to do a whole album now. We're making progress, developing sounds, gearing up again. Why would Wikipedia have an entire article based on that statement? It sounds as if work hasn't even begun. That statement makes the vast majority of the article pure speculation - a valid and verifiable article on the topic would merely state: "Kylie is making progress on her forthcoming album." This one goes into a rather lot of speculation. Why not just merge that line into the singer's article? Srose (talk) 17:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Because this article will exist sooner rather than later. As it exists now, it's best to keep it broken away and allow it to expand as more information comes around. --badlydrawnjeff talk 17:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - under that rationale, you could have an article like this for any existing notable band or artist. I can't help but feel that would get messy. Ac@osr 21:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- That's kind of faulty logic. There's no way of knowing if a band is going to hit it big. There's no question whatsoever Kylie Minogue is going to have another album. --badlydrawnjeff talk 23:21, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment - under that rationale, you could have an article like this for any existing notable band or artist. I can't help but feel that would get messy. Ac@osr 21:23, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Because this article will exist sooner rather than later. As it exists now, it's best to keep it broken away and allow it to expand as more information comes around. --badlydrawnjeff talk 17:44, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- That source states: No one's in a rush to do a whole album now. We're making progress, developing sounds, gearing up again. Why would Wikipedia have an entire article based on that statement? It sounds as if work hasn't even begun. That statement makes the vast majority of the article pure speculation - a valid and verifiable article on the topic would merely state: "Kylie is making progress on her forthcoming album." This one goes into a rather lot of speculation. Why not just merge that line into the singer's article? Srose (talk) 17:32, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Not really faulty logic - every currently popular act and band that is not going to break up will have another album and is usually planning on studio time to put it together. The only thing in the article that is clearly going to happen is that she's going to make an album - this is worth only a line in her article not one by itself - Peripitus (Talk) 07:37, 20 October 2006 (UTC)
- It's linked above. --badlydrawnjeff talk 18:46, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Comment. Errr, Jeff, where exactly is this verifiable source? I don't see any sources listed in the article. Srose (talk) 18:03, 18 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete, haha, you're kidding, right? Maybe when something is actually confirmed it can be given an article, but Wikipedia is not a venue for idle speculation. Lankiveil 22:49, 18 October 2006 (UTC).
- Delete - quote from the reliable source No one's in a rush to do a whole album now. We're making progress, developing sounds, gearing up again - crystal ballism having an article on this. - Peripitus (Talk) 08:22, 19 October 2006 (UTC)
- Delete per crystal ball. EVula 17:37, 20 October 2006 (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.
