Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Darren Collection

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. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 04:12, 17 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Darren Collection[edit]

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

Non-notable future album that doesn't pass WP:N nor WP:RS at this time. ArcAngel (talk) 10:55, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This albums wikipedia page should not be removed because you are damaging an artist page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Croniclataus (talk • contribs) 11:02, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That is faulty reasoning. The album is not yet notable and doesn't appear to have any significant third-party coverage, which is a requirement for articles to be included on Wikipedia. Secondly this album (and the others of this artist) can't pass the WP:MUSIC criteria at this time. If and when these albums receive significant coverage would they be worthy of inclusion into Wikipedia. ArcAngel (talk) 11:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete — Per my entry at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Go U Good Thing about article related to the same singer. Favonian (talk) 11:17, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

comment - the album will be released on every digital download store in the world and you need more proof, Google "Darren Ross Disco Man" and you will get thousands of proof. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Croniclataus (talk • contribs) 11:23, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Approximately 268 hits come up on that search, and in none of the hits could I see any relaible, third-party sources of significant coverage. ArcAngel (talk) 11:30, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.popjustice.com/forum/index.php?topic=16349.120 - look at this —Preceding unsigned comment added by Croniclataus (talk • contribs) 11:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
That's a forum — not usually considered a reliable source for Wikipedia articles. Favonian (talk) 11:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 13:22, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Gongshow ^Talk 22:43, 9 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete, smells of hoax. The image isn't even the right aspect ratio for release artwork, and the metadata indicates it's a cell phone photo. Hairhorn (talk) 15:34, 16 November 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.