Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Introduction of Marcus Cooper

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 Redirect to Pleasure P, on the strength of the Billboard article. When released, and reliable sources appear, there's no reason the redirect can't be undone and the article restored. Xymmax ^{So let it be written} _{So let it be done} 23:31, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Introduction of Marcus Cooper[edit]

Non-notable unreleased album with little or no media coverage. Fails WP:MUSIC#Albums. Prod removed without comment. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 20:50, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 20:52, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect: to Pleasure P. Fails WP:MUSIC. Schuym1 (talk) 21:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pleasure P.. Agree with nom. Bsimmons666 (talk) ^Friend? 21:58, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I would not be opposed to a redirect IF verifiable information from a reliable source shows this is in fact the title of his upcoming album. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 23:38, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Well, here it is: http://www.singersroom.com/news/entertainment-story-2305.asp Schuym1 (talk) 23:53, 29 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - I hate to sound picky, but can you find a more reliable source? An established source "with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy" per WP:RS? The best I could find was Allmusic (not the most reliable of sources 100% of the time) and they said the title was only "tentative". A Google search for the title doesn't turn up much other than blogs and the like. Even the most recent news on the Atlantic Records website doesn't give a name for the album. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 01:25, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Well, it was posted about three times on his MySpace blog -- yeah, yeah, I know...step off with the "not reliable" bullsh*t. He's also said it himself. Also: http://www.singersroom.com/news/entertainment-story-2598.asp I highly doubt so many places would be wrong. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.162.0.181 (talk) 05:17, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Reliability on Wikipedia is not "bullshit", it's one of the cornerstones of the project. A Google search returns a grand total of 44 hits for that name, so it's really not "so many places" saying the title. But don't worry, I found it mentioned in a new Billboard article (in case you're unsure, Billboard does qualify as a reliable source—and that's no bullshit); so I can support a redirect in good conscience. Thanks, though, for posting that singersroom link a second time; that site still looks pretty suspect as far as reliabilty goes. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 09:16, 31 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Well if it's reliable AND has a date AND confirms a number of songs, why delete the page? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.164.8.184 (talk) 07:09, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        And there's about 70 hits, nt 44. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.129.173.235 (talk) 16:04, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        Oh and http://blogs.sohh.com/soul/2008/10/new_keyshia_cole_ft_tupac_vide.html and http://blogs.sohh.com/soul/2008/10/new_keyshia_cole_ft_tupac_vide.html and http://www.pleasurepmusic.com/ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.129.173.235 (talk) 01:18, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        
        At the time I posted the above, there were 44. It now shows 67 but if you page through the results, Google cuts it back to 19! —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 02:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Pleasure P. Fails notability per WP:MUSIC. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 02:40, 30 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep That's a mighty ammount of "media coverage." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.129.173.235 (talk) 01:20, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Mostly blogs and other nn and unreliable sites. Most of it really is "media coverage", but not actual media coverage. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 02:48, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A single from the album has hit the Hot 100. Here's a Billboard article mentioning it [1]. Teemu08 (talk) 20:23, 2 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
~~STRONG Keep~~ Might I add that The-Dream's 'Love vs. Money' has the same sources (Billboard, not to mention a title and single) and it's up and going. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.131.102.51 (talk) 02:08, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- And it also has no media coverage. So, I say ~~Keep~~--172.131.102.51 (talk) 02:32, 3 November 2008 (UTC)P[reply]
  - One !vote per person, please. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 02:46, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note to closing admin All of the IPs that have weighed in so far (172.162.0.181, 172.164.8.184, 172.129.173.235, 172.131.102.51) resolve back to AOL and are almost certainly the same person. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 02:46, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- You just assume it'll be closed. The sources are they're. If this gets closed, I'll know for sure Wikipedia has been smoking something. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.165.200.73 (talk) 06:29, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - I know this AFD will be closed; all AFDs are closed. Whether it's closed as delete, keep, merge, or redirect is up to the closing admin. —Hello, Control ^{Hello, Tony} 10:19, 3 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. SOHH blogs and primary sources do not equate to reliable coverage in any way, shape, or form. coccyx bloccyx_(toccyx) 22:13, 3 November 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.