Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Content (Joywave album)

Content (Joywave album)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Poorly referenced article with few categories and no indication of notability Jax 0677 (talk) 16:06, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: fails WP:NALBUM. DrStrauss talk 16:24, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 16:32, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I was notified about this AfD on my talk page as if I created it however, I'm not the creator. Subject is notable and is covered in countless reliable sources. The page is poorly referenced but deserves to keep if improved. Meatsgains (talk) 16:53, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The album is coming fresh off the shelves so perhaps it is WP:TOOSOON to nominate it for deletion.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 18:51, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TheGracefulSlick: or it might be WP:TOOSOON to have an article in the first place... DrStrauss talk 19:22, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DrStrauss: how so? [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] TheGracefulSlick (talk) 19:34, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TheGracefulSlick: because of the sources you've provided, only 4 and 5 are in-depth reviews dedicated to the album itself. The others are about the artist, not the album. DrStrauss talk 19:37, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@DrStrauss: okay [6] [7] [8] TheGracefulSlick (talk) 19:44, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@TheGracefulSlick: fair enough. Pinging Funnyfrets117 as they were the author - you might want to include these. DrStrauss talk 19:46, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: should probably wait a week or two before deciding to keep or delete, to be honest - the album has literally only been out a few days so any reviews are likely to appear very soon. The album already has an AllMusic review. Richard3120 (talk) 20:34, 31 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]