Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARTPOP (2013 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. I'd have G4ed it myself: none of the issues from the original AFD have been addressed.—Kww(talk) 21:45, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ARTPOP (2013 album)

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

Reasons for deletion: — Preceding unsigned comment added by JovanMonster (talk • contribs) 21:16, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Title fails Wikipedia criteria for capital letters (Form and document creation#Capital Letters) and albums (Wikipedia:NALBUMS).
There's already an existing article - Artpop, but it's currently a redirect to Lady Gaga.
The most of the content is unconfirmed + unsourced. Jovannn (talk) 20:41, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2012 October 24. Snotbot t • c » 20:52, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as premature speculation: any encyclopedic content is already covered elsewhere. Although starting your AfD request with an entirely invalid argument (bad capitalisation) isn't a good way to get support. --Colapeninsula (talk) 22:58, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, seconding Colapeninsula's points. Any brief bits of encyclopedic content found in the article is, at this point, pretty much drowned out by the fancruft. Homeostasis07 (talk) 00:17, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, obviously significant if only RELIABLE information is included. This could be a stub as there is enough information to keep this article afloat. The information can be merged with Artpop and this page can be deleted. Not to be included on her main page, but Artpop as its own article.--TV (talk) 00:38, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I say keep it. Gaga fans need a wikipedia article plus there are other artists whose albums have yet to come out and they have their articles not deleted. Does it have to be deleted even though it will be even more relevant a few months from now? - JJS — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.160.204 (talk) 01:04, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or possibly reduce and merge, for the reasons stated by Colapeninsula.- Mr X 01:22, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Very little info here is reliably sourced; when a standalone Artpop article is deemed appropriate, I would just go ahead and use this early version as a starting point. Gongshow ^Talk 06:38, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. There's no need to redirect, the Artpop page already redirects to Lady Gaga. Not much to merge either.--xanchester (t) 09:08, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: This album already has an article in the incubator at Wikipedia:Article Incubator/Artpop. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARTPOP. Cliff Smith 00:26, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then it's time to bring it out. There's enough info on this subject to create a decent article. A LOT of artists have "John Doe's third album" instead of the actual title. TV | talk 16:25, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:19, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I'll quote my own comments from the article's talk page, after I put a PROD tag on the article which was later removed; "A quote from the relevant standard, which is found at WP:NALBUMS: "Generally, an album should not have an independent article until its title, track listing and release date have all been publicly confirmed by the artist or their record label". I think there is more information here than for most unreleased albums, but there's still no release date." Time enough to remake this if and when the album is released. Ubelowme _U ^Me 18:48, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Wikipedia is not for speculation. Mt king ^(edits) 08:39, 27 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. There is already an Artpop article that has been changed to a redirect.Tay ^(uhoh) 01:48, 29 October 2012 (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.