Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 in music

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. As a note regarding "when to move", I think the best time would be either 1 January 2018 or when more than 3/4 of the links currently present have actually turned blue. Otherwise, there's not much point in having this page. In the meantime, it will be redirected to 2010s in music. Primefac (talk) 01:19, 24 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

2018 in music[edit]

2018 in music (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is about something that will happen in the future, thus meaning that this violates WP:NOTFUTURE. Also, since it is in the future, we cannot verify anything. Thus, it should be deleted. RileyBugz会話投稿記録 17:29, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete- Per nom. Further, the article is entirely void of any useful content. There are plenty of redlinks and empty sections, though. 'Placeholders' do not belong on WP. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ᐐT₳LKᐬ 17:59, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • No Don't Delete This Article save it. 68.102.39.189 (talk) 23:06, 16 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Draftify or redirect to 2010s in music. Clear case of WP:BALL. AdA&D 01:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep part of a series, 2018 is three months away, music recorded now has release dates in 2018 and tour dates are set a year in advance. --RAN (talk) 01:40, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep part of a series. Knuand (talk) 08:43, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I Agree keep this article because 2018 is almost 2 months away. 68.102.39.189 (talk) 15:32, 17 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Delete or draftify -- currently has no reason to be in mainspace. Move it back when there is a nontrivial amount of non-redlinks or content. —Kusma (t·c) 09:00, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Do Not Delete this Article please save it. It has to be part of a series. 68.102.39.189 (talk) 14:21, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify or delete - As 2018 is only three months from now, I think moving it to draftspace would be a good idea. Article violates WP:NOTFUTURE, so deletion is another option if moving it to draft-space isn’t feasible. –Miles Edgeworth Talk 15:39, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes I Agree November 2017 is just around the corner 2018 in soon to be 2 months away. Please keep this article. 68.102.39.189 (talk) 13:33, 19 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Just to clear things up, I am currently not opposed to draftifying, so long as it is not in the mainspace before New Years Day (UTC time, of course). RileyBugz会話投稿記録 02:30, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I Think This Discussion has Ended so I Think By Monday This Article will be kept. 68.102.39.189 (talk) 19:29, 20 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

  • Draftify and move to Mainspace on or after Jan 1st 2018 It should be worked on to include the years releases at that point. Dysklyver 15:25, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep - although it needs editing - I don't like the premise behind this article as it currently reads. I don't think album or DVD releases or planned tours fall under WP:NOTFUTURE as long as its clear that those dates are proposed and not set in stone. For example, knowing the Rolling Stones are going on tour in March is no less notable on Dec. 31 than January 1. And we do have List of 2018 albums, which to me is perfectly fine. Knowing what we have to look forward to is convenient. The LA Times and NY Times have seasonal preview sections for the arts. All good and notable. What bothers me instead is the structure of this article, and the assumptions made by the template. Certain countries and certain genres are listed, whether they have articles or not. Who gets to decide that there should be these 28 countries and these 13 genres? Is the quest to communicate knowledge just limited to filling in the red blanks, or do we want to approach music with an open mind? I'd much prefer to see the article start somewhat blank, and build organically as music is recorded and released. My recommended edits are to remove everything that is redlinked - that does violate WP:NOTFUTURE. Also, the IP voting 5 times in this AfD and proclaiming that he's found consensus also rubs me a bit the wrong way, but I'm still going with keep. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete or Draftify - currently shouldn't be in mainspace as it consists mostly of placeholders. PhilKnight (talk) 01:14, 24 October 2017 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/2018_in_music&oldid=1071822272"