Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Libra Scale

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. WP:HAMMER is not policy, it's an observation that if the name/track order if an upcomming album is not known, then the article is likely to be deleted per other policies/guidelines such as WP:CRYSTAL, WP:NALBUMS or WP:GNG. However, when nominating or discussing the deletion of an article, you should base your arguments on the actual policies or guidelines that may apply. In this case the consensus is that the article does not violate WP:CRYSTAL but it may be weak in the WP:NALBUMS department. However, in general there is no consensus to delete this article. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:47, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Libra Scale

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

violates WP:HAMMER Adabow (talk) 06:29, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:08, 27 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 2 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment WP:HAMMER is an essay, not policy so this reason alone is not enough to justify deletion. A simple google search shows that this article satisfies WP:NOTABILITY. Jdrewitt (talk) 08:10, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per my comment above, it is a notable upcoming album. Jdrewitt (talk) 08:38, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to artist for now, per WP:CRYSTAL/WP:NALBUM. Coverage not significant enough to warrant article at the moment.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 17:35, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

There are many reliable sources that provide both the album title and the release date, including Ne-Yo's official site. The single "Beautiful Monster" which is taken from the album has already premiered. So the article as it stands is not in violation of WP:CRYSTAL. As for WP:NALBUM it does already have significant independent coverage in reliable sources and this is only going to increase. Jdrewitt (talk) 21:18, 3 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Title and release date do not make it worthy of an article yet. As per WP:NALBUMS " Separate articles should not be created until there is sufficient reliably sourced information about a future release." So far, all we have from reliable sources is title, date, and one track, sometimes two. That's at most two sentences in the artist's article. If WP:NALBUMS says Notability aside, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article applies to songs, I don't see why it shouldn't apply for unreleased albums as well.--137.122.49.102 (talk) 17:59, 4 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete just not yet noteable. It does not have enough coverage in RS. WP:CRYSTAL. Keep I took a second look at the article and I took another look at the sources and yea it is noteable. STAT -Verse 21:59, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you are going to quote policy such as WP:CRYSTAL then please state where the article is in violation of such policy. There is nothing in the article that isn't backed up by many verifiable and reliable sources, several of which are cited in the article. Jdrewitt (talk) 18:59, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Several sources confirming its release. Str8cash (talk) 18:12, 6 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Although a title and date are confirmed, a track list and cover art should be included. (WP:TPHL)Adabow (talk) 03:13, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes that would be good but this has absolutely nothing to do with deletion policy! Jdrewitt (talk) 06:54, 7 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has a confirmed release date. Thankyoubaby (talk) 21:12, 8 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep WP:HAMMER doesn't apply here as the name of the album is known, as well as other verifiable information. Further, writing "Violating WP:HAMMER" is in itself a wrong statement; User:TenPoundHammer's Law is neither a policy nor a guideline, but merely a personal essay reflecting a personal opinion which has to be taken with discretion. Maashatra11 (talk) 11:42, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Closure request I request this AfD be closed by virtue of the fact the original nomination was ill-conceived and fundamentally flawed being based solely on an essay without any consideration of actual wikipedia policy. Users above have shown the article satisfies WP:Notability and WP:RS. Any further discussion on what the article should and should not contain should conducted on the article talk page, not here.Jdrewitt (talk) 14:25, 9 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

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.