Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Slipknot's 4th Studio 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 keep. John254 02:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Slipknot's 4th Studio Album
failure of WP:CRYSTAL; only reliable source is the label company's website, and there is no direct link. JonathanT•@•C 23:25, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment Also, there is an invisible message stating that it will be created again if it is deleted. JonathanT•@•C 23:30, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
Deleteper crystal. As soon as there are independent reliable sources, im open for recreation. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:31, 28 November 2007 (UTC) Keep'. Kerrang! magazine is a reliable source. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 14:07, 29 November 2007 (UTC)- Strong Keep We need to keep the album. What makes it so different from all of Wikipedia's other pages on future albums, huh? How official is word-of-mouth from the band itself? This thing is gonna happen. Dark Executioner (talk) 23:33, 28 November 2007 (UTC)Dark Executioner
-
- Good question. The obvious answer is they should be kept only if there are reliable sources that already discuss the future album. The reality is that many should, in my oppinion, be deleted for the same reasons as this article should be deleted, as very few have reliable sources. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- My point being, that there ARE official sources! Multiple magazine interviews, the band's website, Roadrunner's website... all of these are official! I'm pretty sure that even their Myspace says something about the album! What you guys should realize is that all of the information on the page is already on the Internet on verious sites - I just put them on one place here on Wikipedia. A bunch of you think that I just "made up" the info, but the fact is that I didn't. Dark Executioner (talk) 17:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)Dark Executioner
- Reply on your talkpage, not relevant to this AfD. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 17:41, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- My point being, that there ARE official sources! Multiple magazine interviews, the band's website, Roadrunner's website... all of these are official! I'm pretty sure that even their Myspace says something about the album! What you guys should realize is that all of the information on the page is already on the Internet on verious sites - I just put them on one place here on Wikipedia. A bunch of you think that I just "made up" the info, but the fact is that I didn't. Dark Executioner (talk) 17:39, 29 November 2007 (UTC)Dark Executioner
- Good question. The obvious answer is they should be kept only if there are reliable sources that already discuss the future album. The reality is that many should, in my oppinion, be deleted for the same reasons as this article should be deleted, as very few have reliable sources. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 23:36, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
- Comment - I'm currently assisting User:Dark Executioner with sourcing. I have added a proper reference to Roadrunner's news on the album, at least. --Stormie (talk) 00:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Strong keep. Jasca Ducato (talk) 12:36, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Keep Sources provided. --AnonEMouse (squeak) 20:02, 29 November 2007 (UTC)
- Strong Keep I have just updated the article with direct sources to many reliable sources including established websites, magazines and tv shows which include direct information from band members. Rezter 18:25, 2 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.
