Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don't Click Play

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 move to draft‎. Consensus is that the album isn't notable yet, but is likely (but not certain) to be so once released in a few months. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:09, 19 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Click Play

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

As I said in my redirect edit, "One Instagram post from the artist with zero reliable coverage for the album itself (I'm not convinced coverage for the singles is enough here since the album is a footnote in those articles)." Even a few hours into the next day, there still has been no new coverage of this announcement. Even Billboard, which had an article about Max just a month ago which is included here, have not published anything about this album announcement. I do not see notability here at this time, still believe the article is premature, and that a redirect to the artist's page is still the best option until more coverage comes along. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:09, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 11:09, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It shouldn't be deleted, it's not consistent with practice for other articles. I guarantee you if Taylor Swift announced a new studio album and all we had was posts from her on social media and no news coverage, that there wouldn't be a deletion discussion. While she certainly is no Taylor Swift, Ava has BILLIONS of streams, hundreds of millions of YouTube views, won MTV & iHeart awards, topped charts in 20 countries, certified albums platinum, etc which qualify her as a major pop artist in several countries. An artist's official announcement (with reposts by the official record label) is enough info. There really are no MAJOR pop music magazines, websites, that the general public is aware of. Not everything is a news article, like many, many other articles on Wikipedia, this refers to a specific niche which has attracted notability within a certain group, in this case the European music industry. And you have to be aware that the announcement was made yesterday afternoon. 216.106.93.194 (talk) 15:33, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That does not make this album notable. Also, see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS λ NegativeMP1 16:40, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's standards for notability are not based on assuming whether the general public knows about something. There is a long history as to why we look to what are considered reliable sources such as professional music publications. If they aren't covering an album announcement, then we shouldn't have an article for it just on the assumption that it just has to be huge deal, even if it's from Taylor Swift (though I see headlines about every other time she breathes so I doubt that'd ever happen). And Ava Max being notable herself, a fact that I have and would not deny, does not mean that every album she releases is automatically as well; notability is not inherited after all. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 10:51, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

If Taylor Swift only announced a new album on social media only, it would be at most a one line mention in her article, not a whole article. Oaktree b (talk) 16:08, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. No significant coverage in reliable sources, and therefore not notable. Likely a case of too soon if anything. λ NegativeMP1 16:40, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@NegativeMP1 [1] I just checked new Billboard article was uploaded, what's your think? Camilasdandelions (talk!) 06:21, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Has some released music and has multiple reliable sources discussing the teasers for the upcoming album. TOOSOON is an essay that calls attention to there being a problem with there not being enough reliable sources to talk about a thing yet, but two reliable sources talking about the album are in the article, which is well-cited. It seems fine to me. Mrfoogles (talk) 17:30, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Delete~~ As the nomination states, there is no significant coverage in reliable sources for this album. It's just an instagram post, and the billboard article that does not mention the album is literally about the artist trolling which makes the instagram post seem even less reliable. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 21:48, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Did you read the cited articles? No mention of upcoming album in the billboard article. RollingStone and Uproxx just mention teases of a new album and there is no significant coverage in either. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 21:50, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Anonrfjwhuikdzz [2] I just checked new Billboard article was uploaded, what's your think? Camilasdandelions (talk!) 06:20, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I still concur with QuietHere below. The single billboard reference still reads mainly like routine coverage of an album announcement.

That said, I think Draftify is probably more appropriate than deletion at this point. It's clear that there are interested editors who will update the article as the album release approaches/happens so I don't think it will languish there for eternity like some articles sent to draft space. Anonrfjwhuikdzz (talk) 16:16, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would absolutely support draftifying. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 18:43, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or redirect back to Ava Max — it fails WP:FUTUREALBUM I think? Limmidy (talk) 02:33, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Limmidy [3] I just checked new Billboard article was uploaded, what's your think? Camilasdandelions (talk!) 06:20, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: This article, namely the album is already notable, and the other medias must be going to publish about this album soon. No reaso to be deleted like this, and also many users may not recognize this fact:

Please note that the failure to meet any of these criteria does not mean an article must be deleted;

Camilasdandelions (talk!) 02:34, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

[4] Now I got a source for it. So I sustain ~~Keep~~. Camilasdandelions (talk!) 05:15, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

1. @Camilasdandelions you're only allowed one vote per discussion; regardless if it's just you reiterating your point, you shouldn't post a bolded vote twice.

2. Unfortunately, while I'm glad to see one major publication finally covering this, typically it's preferred to see at least two or three for an upcoming album. After so many days, somehow, Billboard are still the only ones to have done so, so I am still unconvinced that this album is ready for an article at this time. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 08:44, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Billboard's article about the album's announcement was published yesterday, just a day after this article was made a candidate for deletion. The album was only announced three days ago. I think it would be purposeless hassle to delete this article and then inevitably bring it back in under a week. Abby Abangan (talk) 17:41, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
"inevitably" and "under a week" are both assumptions that Wikipedia does not have room for. We have no idea when or even if more coverage will appear, and we can't just leave articles live on the expectation that it could. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 18:45, 4 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The album has a Billboard article for its announcement, and multiple major music publications referenced the album in articles related to pre-release singles. There is no objective standard by which this article should definitively be deleted, so it's really a matter of whether someone wants to go through unnecessary trouble or not. Abby Abangan (talk) 00:44, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete It is better to delete it unless by attaching more sources. 110 and 135 (talk) 06:14, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I'm sympathetic to the points made above that Max is a very well-known artist and her third album is guaranteed to be notable, so per WP:NOTBURO deleting this temporarily is a waste. In addition to the Billboard piece, the album announcement has been covered on some other sites [5][6] and a promotional campaign for it has also been covered [7]. This isn't the strongest sourcing ever, but in my opinion, when combined with the context of the artist, it's enough to keep this article. Toadspike [Talk] 11:10, 10 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There are a few more sources when searching "Ava Max third album": [8][9] Toadspike [Talk] 09:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yahoo News is an aggregator, not a publication. The article comes from Where Is the Buzz (their logo is visible at the top of the page), which I have never heard of. That doesn't necessarily make it unreliable of course, but their about page doesn't mention anything about an editorial team/policy so it's definitely questionable. And as I've already said, I don't believe very strongly in most of the pre-announcement coverage which makes no reference to the album itself. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Just found [10] this. I'm not sure that all of these music journalism websites are of awesome quality, but I think I can reasonably argue that the GNG is met now. Toadspike [Talk] 05:46, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, asilvering (talk) 07:00, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: The Billboard post is a RS, the rest help prove this. I see no point in deleting the article then having to-recreate it in less than 6mths if the album does happen. Oaktree b (talk) 16:10, 11 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps draftify then? The page is new enough that this would be reasonable. (ETA: and yes, this is my !vote) Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 09:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose that's fine, it's coming out in less than three months. This is a release from a major artist. I'd be surprised if it gets zero media coverage in that time. I see no harm in leaving it live in wiki until then, but draft is an acceptable compromise. Oaktree b (talk) 14:06, 13 May 2025 (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.