Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Solid Gold (Nikki Yanofsky album)

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. The strength of the comments provides a consensus to delete. Without prejudice to recreating when the album has been released. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 16:25, 1 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Solid Gold (Nikki Yanofsky album)

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

Unreleased album, with no reliable sources to show notability. In reponse to "uncited" tag, the editor put references to the artist's tumblr and instagram. Claim that Wyclef Jean is the producer might be true, but also not supported by reliable sources. A brief web search didn't turn up in-depth discussion of the topic. Slashme (talk) 18:46, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This album along with her single "Young Love" that was released yesterday is HUGE news to the fandom and her community. Her Instagram, Twitter, and other social media sites she's verified on are already posting promos, teasers, and clips of what's to come with the new album "Solid Gold." It'd be a real tragedy to hide that considering that we haven't heard anything new from Nikki Yanofsky on her songs for more than a couple years now. I've made a post on the Wikipedia reliable sources noticeboard to get some clarification on whether or not her profiles can be used as reliable sources, since Yanofsky is a rising artist and not many reports are being done on her, making it hard to find other sources. In short, the reply I got was that these profiles CAN be used in the articles citations as long as it follows the policies given in WP:SOCIALMEDIA. In this case, I'm sure that Nikki Yanofsky is an expert on the topic Nikki Yanofsky and can provide reliable information. The article has sources that also link to this years IdeaCity fest where she announced that she's working on the album with Wyclef Jean. (IDEACITY, @5:52). She performed a number of the songs to be featured on the new album including "Me Myself and I" and "I Owe It All To You." Both these songs along with her latest single "Young Love" are featured in one of her posts that talk about the track listing of Solid Gold. Because there is this background information, using her social media profiles shouldn't be an issue as shown in Wikipedia's social media policies. They just add more information and details.

This is very important news and the album should be coming around within the next few weeks. This has been known already since November of last year. EDIT: Her tumblr is currently the redirect from her official website http://www.nikkiyanofsky.com which is owned by Quincy Jones Production and her A440 Entertainment label. Me00lmeals (talk) 20:05, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

So if I understand you correctly, you're saying that all the information you can find about this song is from self-published sources? --Slashme (talk) 12:59, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep or redirect - This article should be kept, or redirected to either Young Love (Nikki Yanofsky song) or Nikki Yanofsky. That being said, the page history should NOT be deleted. --Jax 0677 (talk) 03:47, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please provide sources that show that this album passes WP:NMUSIC? --Slashme (talk) 12:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 14:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - @Slashme:, at this time, I am not specifically advocating for a separate article for the album. However, if the article cannot be kept, it should be redirected per WP:CHEAP as a valid search term. --Jax 0677 (talk) 15:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Understood. I'd be OK with a redir, but then we need a decision here, otherwise there will just be an edit war about whether it should be redirected or not. --Slashme (talk) 19:57, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All albums are not automatically notable just because they (will) exist; an album is notable enough for its own article only if and when reliable source coverage in published media which (a) is independent of the musician's own self-published social networking presence, and (b) verifies one or more criteria that would pass WP:NALBUMS, can be provided to support it. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a free advertising platform — articles on here must be based on reliable sources, and not on an artist's own self-published marketing efforts. Creative professionals are not objective observers of their own work, so their own self-published content about it can be larded through with overinflated public relations hype — which is why her own social media posts about a new album are not sufficient sourcing to get the album an article if real media outlets haven't written about it yet. Delete, without prejudice against recreation if and when proper sources can be added to carry it. Bearcat (talk) 17:19, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - @Bearcat: What if A440 Entertainment which is her label announced that the album is coming out? Would that be considered a reliable source, and if so would the other sources we already have up on this page be usable if there's the label to back it up? Me00lmeals (talk) 04:03, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'll step in here. No, it would not. Notability is based upon reliable third-party sources. The label releasing the album is clearly not a third-party source. I don't believe that the article as it stands is using one single reliable source, period, as everything is being sourced directly from the artist. You need to understand what is required for a proper article first, and probably one of the biggest things is that the album (in this case) needs to exist. MSJapan (talk) 04:36, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It would help only in the sense that once the label announced an official release date, the media would probably start actually writing about it. The record label's own press release would not cover off the reliable sourcing issue all by itself, however — it would be a step in the right direction, not the final answer, and you'd still have to wait for actual media coverage to actually appear. Bearcat (talk) 15:02, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No WP:RS, WP:CRYSTAL at present, overuse of WP:SELFPUB, fails WP:NALBUM by default as a result. MSJapan (talk) 04:36, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply - @MSJapan: Ok I see, then this album shouldn't have it's own article. However I'd rather have this redirected to the Nikki Yanofsky Discography section but not lose any of what we have on here so far. Only because this album is VERY close to it's release and it's very important news in the community. Nikki and her label A440 along with Quincy Jones Productions have confirmed it so it should make some appearance on her article. Then once reliable sources are discovered this page can in a way be brought back. Keep this discussion going till there's a decision and let me know what you think. Me00lmeals (talk) 05:07, 25 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Me00lmeals: "What is here" is not encyclopedically appropriate. It's also not important until someone besides Yanofsky et al says it is. Wikipedia is a lagging indicator of notability, not a forerunner. It doesn't matter what anyone involved with the album has said or done with it, period. Album info can be added to the Yanofsky article once it actually exists, and if the album gets to a point where it meets NALBUM, it can have its own article, but not before. BTW, you're sounding a lot like a PR rep here, and if you have any sort of connection with any of the companies or artists you have mentioned, you should not be creating articles on them, and you need to read WP:COI as well. MSJapan (talk) 05:58, 25 July 2016 (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.