Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Homegrown (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 Keep, please add sources identified here to the article. Davewild (talk) 12:07, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Homegrown (album)[edit]

Fails Wikipedia:Music#Albums_and_songs: Unreleased albums are not notable unless there has been substantial coverage in reliable sources. Mdsummermsw (talk) 14:04, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - As a major project of Neil Young, with substantial evidence to support its near-release status, it's clearly notable. Ed Fitzgerald (unfutz) ^{(talk / cont)} 21:03, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - We have lyrics on a fansite and the cover on the cover artist's website. That is not "substantial coverage", nor is it in "reliable sources". Were we trying to merely show that there was strong-ish evidence that the album existed, I'd agree. That is not the issue. It is not notable under Wikipedia's guidelines. - Mdsummermsw (talk) 21:24, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep [1][2][3][4][5][6]

Theres another 9 pages of published books that get hits on google [7]. Ridernyc (talk) 22:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice if someone would actually work some of those sources into the article, or at least in a links section. Wikidemo (talk) 09:33, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

not going to argue that, but this all could have been dealt with without coming to AFD. Ridernyc (talk) 09:34, 27 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 22:21, 25 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep per Ridernyc. —Torc. ^(Talk.) 19:54, 26 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Unencyclopaedic. The paragraph

Sometime in the near future, Neil Young will be releasing his Archives series, his long-awaited compilation of unreleased material. Young has already stated that, among other things, unreleased albums will appear on Archives in their entirety ^{[citation needed]}, leading to speculation among fans that Homegrown will appear in the set.

appears to violate WP:CRYSTAL. Further, there are no references from reliable sources, which is a requirement for any article on wikipedia. This article appears to contain primary research and guesswork, e.g.

Personnel: Unknown, either David Briggs or Elliot Mazer produced most of the songs that were released on later albums.

For the above reasons I support deletion of the page. Cloudz679 (talk) 10:13, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This album was shelved in the 1970's, WP:Crystal has no application at all here. Also the fact that you have totally ignored numerous published sources posted in this AFD is disturbing. Amazing how people are now nit picking individual lines in articles and trying to use that to justify deletion. Ridernyc (talk) 11:14, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's an unreleased album with a possible future release date. It meets WP:CRYSTAL for me. Particularly the part which states All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable. There's no verification at the page, hence my point of view. Maybe it would suit you better to just remove the information I was specifying in my last post. Cloudz679 (talk) 15:35, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Again how is that reason for deletion of the article? Ridernyc (talk) 15:39, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I don't think the material the two of you are discussing will impact the outcome of this discussion. It doesn't seem to be sourced or source-able, so it doesn't support a "keep", but it isn't a sizable enough portion that removing it would push toward "delete". Perhaps this side issue can be discussed on the article's talk page and decided separately? - Mdsummermsw (talk) 16:38, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

exactly the point I was trying to make. Ridernyc (talk) 17:11, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Ridernyc and others, there is more than sufficient evidence of the album's notability here to sustain an article. RFerreira (talk) 19:19, 29 February 2008 (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.