- 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. Consensus is although there were WP:CRYSTAL concerns, the community believes improvement of the article is possible in all circumstances. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:16, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
BETSY (album)
- BETSY (album) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable album that is not mentioned in any reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG and all relevant subject notability guidelines. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 02:58, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: the singer is notable, she's been mentioned in several reliable sources [1], [2], [3]... but she doesn't have an article of her own, so a redirect won't be possible. I suspect this is WP:TOOSOON and that in a month's time there will be plenty of sources to justify this article, but for now I'm not sure of the best course of action. Richard3120 ( talk) 21:47, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- I recently deleted the singer's article for being a blatant copyvio, but if anyone recreates it, it could be a valid retarget target.---- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 00:16, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947( c) ( m) 18:50, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947( c) ( m) 18:50, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep I can't see the point of deleting this - yes the bio should have been deleted as a copyvio, but I've just recreated as a sourced stub. When Warner Records gets behind an artist they and the album are guaranteed notability for as long as the association with Warner lasts. In ictu oculi ( talk) 13:10, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. I would have suggested merging it to the two-sentence article on the probably-not-notable-enough-yet singer, but there's no sourced content here and the article title is wrong (we don't try to replicate typography in article titles). Why on earth do people keep creating such crappy album articles? -- Michig ( talk) 07:06, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- @
Michig: since the AfD was created, the article title has been changed to the correct title
Betsy (Betsy album). I guess in answer to your question, there are overenthusiastic editors who are so keen to get the first possible piece of news up on Wikipedia and not worry too much about adding an RS, but I share your annoyance – if they had waited a little longer and not been
WP:TOOSOON with this article, we wouldn't be having this deletion discussion in the first place. With the publicity and connections this artist has, it's very likely that within a fortnight there will be reviews and chart placings, so I understand In ictu oculi's argument... if this gets deleted now it's probable that it will get recreated almost immediately and with sufficient reliable sources to ensure it passes WP:NALBUM. I am aware that my argument is WP:CRYSTALBALL, but I have no strong feelings on keeping or deleting this article... in the meantime it's in limbo a bit, unfortunately.
Richard3120 (
talk) 19:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- Whether or not this album does receive coverage, since it's just about the only thing she's done, it can still be perfectly adequately covered in the article on the singer, which isn't going to get so large that it needs to be split any time soon. It would be much better to expand that article with any content from reliable sources rather than having two weak stubby articles. --
Michig (
talk) 19:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- What is the rush? The album will be released by Warner in 7 days. Why not just hold on and wait for Warner's giant press machine to pump out the sources. It won't break to wait a week. Besides there are sources enough now anyway. Keep. In ictu oculi ( talk) 23:13, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Whether or not this album does receive coverage, since it's just about the only thing she's done, it can still be perfectly adequately covered in the article on the singer, which isn't going to get so large that it needs to be split any time soon. It would be much better to expand that article with any content from reliable sources rather than having two weak stubby articles. --
Michig (
talk) 19:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- @
Michig: since the AfD was created, the article title has been changed to the correct title
Betsy (Betsy album). I guess in answer to your question, there are overenthusiastic editors who are so keen to get the first possible piece of news up on Wikipedia and not worry too much about adding an RS, but I share your annoyance – if they had waited a little longer and not been
WP:TOOSOON with this article, we wouldn't be having this deletion discussion in the first place. With the publicity and connections this artist has, it's very likely that within a fortnight there will be reviews and chart placings, so I understand In ictu oculi's argument... if this gets deleted now it's probable that it will get recreated almost immediately and with sufficient reliable sources to ensure it passes WP:NALBUM. I am aware that my argument is WP:CRYSTALBALL, but I have no strong feelings on keeping or deleting this article... in the meantime it's in limbo a bit, unfortunately.
Richard3120 (
talk) 19:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep I agree with the user In ictu oculi. The album will be released in a week by Warner Bros. so it will probably gain notability. Also the artist was featured in the Guardian's "One to watch" series in August. link AndreasAt ( talk) 22:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. Consensus is although there were WP:CRYSTAL concerns, the community believes improvement of the article is possible in all circumstances. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 10:16, 22 September 2017 (UTC)
BETSY (album)
- BETSY (album) ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Non-notable album that is not mentioned in any reliable sources. Fails WP:GNG and all relevant subject notability guidelines. -- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 02:58, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 04:35, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- Comment: the singer is notable, she's been mentioned in several reliable sources [1], [2], [3]... but she doesn't have an article of her own, so a redirect won't be possible. I suspect this is WP:TOOSOON and that in a month's time there will be plenty of sources to justify this article, but for now I'm not sure of the best course of action. Richard3120 ( talk) 21:47, 31 August 2017 (UTC)
- I recently deleted the singer's article for being a blatant copyvio, but if anyone recreates it, it could be a valid retarget target.---- Patar knight - chat/ contributions 00:16, 2 September 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947( c) ( m) 18:50, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, J 947( c) ( m) 18:50, 7 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep I can't see the point of deleting this - yes the bio should have been deleted as a copyvio, but I've just recreated as a sourced stub. When Warner Records gets behind an artist they and the album are guaranteed notability for as long as the association with Warner lasts. In ictu oculi ( talk) 13:10, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America 1000 02:22, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
- Delete. I would have suggested merging it to the two-sentence article on the probably-not-notable-enough-yet singer, but there's no sourced content here and the article title is wrong (we don't try to replicate typography in article titles). Why on earth do people keep creating such crappy album articles? -- Michig ( talk) 07:06, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- @
Michig: since the AfD was created, the article title has been changed to the correct title
Betsy (Betsy album). I guess in answer to your question, there are overenthusiastic editors who are so keen to get the first possible piece of news up on Wikipedia and not worry too much about adding an RS, but I share your annoyance – if they had waited a little longer and not been
WP:TOOSOON with this article, we wouldn't be having this deletion discussion in the first place. With the publicity and connections this artist has, it's very likely that within a fortnight there will be reviews and chart placings, so I understand In ictu oculi's argument... if this gets deleted now it's probable that it will get recreated almost immediately and with sufficient reliable sources to ensure it passes WP:NALBUM. I am aware that my argument is WP:CRYSTALBALL, but I have no strong feelings on keeping or deleting this article... in the meantime it's in limbo a bit, unfortunately.
Richard3120 (
talk) 19:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- Whether or not this album does receive coverage, since it's just about the only thing she's done, it can still be perfectly adequately covered in the article on the singer, which isn't going to get so large that it needs to be split any time soon. It would be much better to expand that article with any content from reliable sources rather than having two weak stubby articles. --
Michig (
talk) 19:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- What is the rush? The album will be released by Warner in 7 days. Why not just hold on and wait for Warner's giant press machine to pump out the sources. It won't break to wait a week. Besides there are sources enough now anyway. Keep. In ictu oculi ( talk) 23:13, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- Whether or not this album does receive coverage, since it's just about the only thing she's done, it can still be perfectly adequately covered in the article on the singer, which isn't going to get so large that it needs to be split any time soon. It would be much better to expand that article with any content from reliable sources rather than having two weak stubby articles. --
Michig (
talk) 19:21, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- @
Michig: since the AfD was created, the article title has been changed to the correct title
Betsy (Betsy album). I guess in answer to your question, there are overenthusiastic editors who are so keen to get the first possible piece of news up on Wikipedia and not worry too much about adding an RS, but I share your annoyance – if they had waited a little longer and not been
WP:TOOSOON with this article, we wouldn't be having this deletion discussion in the first place. With the publicity and connections this artist has, it's very likely that within a fortnight there will be reviews and chart placings, so I understand In ictu oculi's argument... if this gets deleted now it's probable that it will get recreated almost immediately and with sufficient reliable sources to ensure it passes WP:NALBUM. I am aware that my argument is WP:CRYSTALBALL, but I have no strong feelings on keeping or deleting this article... in the meantime it's in limbo a bit, unfortunately.
Richard3120 (
talk) 19:12, 15 September 2017 (UTC)
- Keep I agree with the user In ictu oculi. The album will be released in a week by Warner Bros. so it will probably gain notability. Also the artist was featured in the Guardian's "One to watch" series in August. link AndreasAt ( talk) 22:59, 21 September 2017 (UTC)
- 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.