Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Parody Album: Chris Moyles

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. (non-admin closure) Tim Song (talk) 23:51, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Parody Album: Chris Moyles

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

Article claims to be about a yet-to-be-released album, so per WP:CRYSTAL it shouldn't be here. Another problem is that a sizable part of it is lifted verbatim from Chris Moyles#Parody songs, so it's not like new and relevant information is being added to Wikipedia. Favonian (talk) 12:17, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as per nom G~~ain~~Line ♠ _♥ 13:36, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Vastly improved and notability asserted G~~ain~~Line ♠ _♥ 13:24, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete yet to be released, doubt it will be notable when it is. Declan Clam (talk) 16:59, 26 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. This is about a yet-to-be-released album, which has already been recorded, is to be released on 23 November[1], and is already listed in Play.com, Amazon [2], HMV, etc. for pre-order. It seems inconceivable that this will not receive significant coverage in the coming weeks, and there is already coverage out there - [3], [4], [5], [6], [7].--Michig (talk) 07:21, 27 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep. A solution would be do delete the section of the Chris moyles article about parody songs. Fodge15 (talk) 17:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
keep. Article is notable, but requires a cleanup. Riksweeney (talk) 15:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Article cleaned up and all unneccesary material regarding parody songs removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Stuart1000 (talk • contribs) 17:40, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Good work! Looks like a consensus is building to keep the article, and that's fine with me. Favonian (talk) 17:51, 29 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep definately keep - going to be released. No reason to be deleted, just another Moyles hater probably. Jonesy702 (talk) 18:53, 29 October 2009 (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.