Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ARTPOP

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 Lady Gaga. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:19, 14 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

ARTPOP

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

Merge. WP:CRYSTAL. This is basically a product announcement really. All that's know about the album is that Lady Gaga is working with producers a, b, and c, album is called ARTPOP and she's been working on it. That hardly merits its own page at the time being. --Shadow (talk) 02:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:39, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:HAMMER; no confirmed release date or tracklist. I suppose a merge (into the "2011–present" section of the main Lady Gaga article) or redirect might be acceptable. But at this very early stage, basically all that's been reported on this future release so far is taken from a few of her tweets and a picture of a tattoo. WP:CRYSTAL. Gongshow ^Talk 05:46, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Put down the WP:HAMMER! Statυs (talk) 11:09, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – It was just announced. Give it some time to have more announcements, please. 68.44.51.49 (talk) 16:11, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Who's to say any major information is going to come out anytime soon? A title, twelve month period of release, and some information saying she is recording and what she wants to do is not enough ot merit an article in general. --Shadow (talk) 02:58, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect/possible merge to Lady Gaga, I'm aware of Wiki policies but come on, this is pretty much guaranteed to be article-worthy sometime in the future, it may not be at the moment, but there's not much point in deleting it. –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:37, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
REDIRECT An article for ARTPOP already exists and is titled Artpop (Lady Gaga album), and it is more in-depth, more sourced, longer, and better written. Either ARTPOP should be redirected to Artpop (Lady Gaga album) or ARTPOP should be deleted and the contents of Artpop (Lady Gaga album) should be moved to it. ARTPOP is gonna have some major merit in the very near future so why not leave it? PinkFunhouse13 (talk) 21:30, 6 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

If the history here is preserved, we will need to do a history merge with Artpop (Lady Gaga album). Two articles, same topic. —C.Fred (talk) 00:22, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:CRYSTAL, the article is premature. No prejudice against a redirect to Lady Gaga. Till 02:43, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Way too early for this article to be up, either merge with Lady Gaga or put it into an incubator for now. 94.169.100.224 (talk) 17:03, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Incubate/Merge It will likely be of importance in the future but that is hard to tell right now. I think putting it into an incubator might be best for all involved - it really would be nice to work on the article from early on. However, if not, it's only right that it be merged. It does and will continue to fail WP:CRYSTAL for a very long time. Adam 94 (talk) 17:52, 7 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I think we've got two options here. We can keep the article and have a single, curated point for information on the album to get added, vetted, formatted, and brought into Wikipedia guideline compliance. Alternatively, we can follow WP:V, WP:NALBUM, WP:HAMMER and the like and redirect this title to Lady Gaga...and then protect this page...and then clean up 300 iterations of ARTPOP (OMG guyz this is reely teh title!) as we find them. I think the former is more in keeping with big-picture principles of Wikipedia, even if we have to ignore a rule or two along the way—and maybe it will show all the Little Monsters who come to edit the article that all Wikipedia veterans and admins aren't big scary monsters. —C.Fred (talk) 00:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Lady Gaga. This unfinished or unreleased album has very little encyclopedic information. Early for an album article. Esc2003 (talk) 15:29, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Incubate and redirect the title to Lady Gaga per WP:NALBUMS. The track listing and release date have yet to be confirmed, and information about the album can remain at its subsection at the artist's article for now. I do not think there is enough verifiable, reliably sourced information about the album to warrant an independent article at this time. Cliff Smith 20:53, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Unnecessary even to discuss the. Seyitahmetmrk (talk) 08:45, 9 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Unnecessary how? Because it's Lady Gaga? That's not a valid reason to keep the page. It's about the information, sources, etc., not who the album belongs too. --Shadow (talk) 15:57, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Other artists and bands have pages for their upcoming albums. This isn't a TBD/TBA type entry.Partyclams (talk) 02:09, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. Each articles should be evaluated according to their contents. The real problem is absence of encyclopedic information in this article. Esc2003 (talk) 10:12, 10 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per WP:NALBUM. No release date, no confirmed track list and does not meet the "exceptional" requirements for unreleased material. --Tgeairn (talk) 19:55, 11 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Random User. The more information she reveals the more relevant the article is. Don't delete it. --[[User:]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.38.160.204 (talk) 00:15, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Incubate as per WP:CRYSTALBALL and WP:NALBUM. Seems to contain some reliable sources (I think) and shouldn't be entirely deleted. Bleubeatle (talk) 02:27, 12 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge/Incubate. There isn't really enough information for it to warrant its own article right now, but there will obviously be more information in the future. Alphius (talk) 04:01, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Convoluted: I tried to close this, but then decided my editing of one of the related articles would have crossed the WP:INVOLVED line. My action in the undone close was history merge, redirect, protect. A little tough to untangle consensus here. All the policy and guideline based arguments aim for delete or merge. The ability to actually merge the material seems iffy, as the article doesn't contain a lot of well-sourced factual data that is eligible to merge. As C.Fred points out, there's a parallel article at Artpop (Lady Gaga album). So, I would install a redirect (as a portion of the merge). I'd protect the result for a few months (as a nod to the delete camp, who clearly believe that the content should not be easily resurrected). I'd history merge Artpop (Lady Gaga album) into it. Any editor that can identify any merge-worthy material is free to do so.—Kww(talk) 13:25, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No track order or release date available. No separate article warranted this far in advance. Hekerui (talk) 07:22, 14 August 2012 (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.