Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miley Cyrus' fourth album
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 delete. Ryan PostlethwaiteSee the mess I've created or let's have banter 23:37, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Miley Cyrus' fourth album[edit]
My-my-my-my music hits me... so hard
Makes me say, oh my Lord
- Miley Cyrus' fourth album (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)
Seems WP:TOOSOON, WP:CRYSTAL. Was tagged for WP:CSD by an IP editor. Jguy TalkDone 01:28, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Stop! - Hammer time. Stalwart111 04:34, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. There is a small amount of relevant information around her signing for RCA, working with a few producers, etc. and that is more than adequately covered in the Miley Cyrus article. A standalone article is not yet justified. --Michig (talk) 07:10, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. I think it should be at least has a TITTLE, but now, not we only know that is gonna be happening, but not for now. shoud be deleted for now. A standalone article is not yet justified. -- --Raúl Romero (talk) 11:56, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per WP:CRYSTAL. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 14:26, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]- On second thought, Redirect to Miley Cyrus discography. For a second there I forgot my own Wiki beliefs. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 14:30, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Why would it be useful to redirect this to an article where it (quite rightly) isn't mentioned? --Michig (talk) 15:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- I always prefer redirection to deletion, and "We Can't Stop" is mentioned on the discography page, which is currently the only somewhat notable thing about the album. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 15:25, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Why would it be useful to redirect this to an article where it (quite rightly) isn't mentioned? --Michig (talk) 15:01, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- On second thought, Redirect to Miley Cyrus discography. For a second there I forgot my own Wiki beliefs. öBrambleberry of RiverClan 14:30, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:32, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Incubate The article was being tagged by IPs whose edits are similar and disruptive as those of TheRaulRomero/ECMLol There is enough reliable information the album will happen and will be released, only is missed when and its title. NotCrystal and essays are generally not a good reason to delete. Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:44, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Incubate Some useful info here, but definitely premature for a mainspace article. Adabow (talk) 03:07, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Userfy for the minute. As things currently stand now, the Billboard source is the only one that specifically talks about the album in depth, and hence is the only one than can substantially contribute towards WP:NALBUMS. Just because we assume an album will be released is no guarantee it definitely will. When we've got chart placings, then it can have an article. That's kind of what WP:HAMMER is all about. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 12:47, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Fails WP:NALBUMS and WP:CRYSTAL. No title, cover, release date, wide coverage in reliable sources, anything. Definitely too soon. STATic message me! 17:36, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. What STATic said. Makes no odds, but I see little point in userfying or incubating; most of the content would (or should) be re-written once enough actual facts are known to merit an article. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 22:52, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- If you want to !vote delete, that kind of implies you think all, not just most, of the content should be re-written, doesn't it? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:13, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. As per WP:TOOSOON. --Lprd2007 (talk) 08:17, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete per WP:HAMMER and WP:SNOW. Bearian (talk) 18:01, 26 June 2013 (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.