Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Upcoming LCD Soundsystem fourth studio 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 draftify. (non-admin closure) GeoffreyT2000 (talk, contribs) 00:06, 5 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Upcoming LCD Soundsystem fourth studio album

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

This would be more suitable for a draft, that can be later moved into an actual article. See WP:TOOSOON and WP:CRYSTAL. TheKaphox T 11:59, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:09, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per WP:TOOSOON and WP:HAMMER. If there's not title, release date, or track list, its generally too soon for an article. It's also worth noting that, despite the article's length, very little of it is about the actual album itself. Much of it is commentary on them reforming, touring, etc, which is fine for background context in larger, detailed article, but not okay to be the primary basis of the article. Sergecross73 msg me 15:18, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Draftify: definitely WP:TOOSOON, but will undoubtedly be notable when it eventually comes out, and unlike the majority of these TOOSOON cases there are already a lot of good sources for the background to this album – it would be a shame to simply delete the article and lose them, when the background to the group reforming and making a new record after five years would be useful in context of the wider album article. I'm looking forward to this record as much as anybody, but I agree it shouldn't be in mainspace just yet. Richard3120 (talk) 16:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

For what its worth, it seems like most of it is just ripped from the more recent sections of the band's article, so I don't believe all that much would be lost, but I don't oppose sending it to draft space either. Sergecross73 msg me 18:28, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, I didn't check that article. If that's the case I wouldn't be opposed to deletion either. Richard3120 (talk) 18:43, 26 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 22:39, 29 October 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.