- Songs from the Tainted Cherry Tree (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)
Article discussion was deleted (or i just cant find it, please tell me if you do).
The album article was originally deleted for failing WP:HAMMER. According to that logic it should be recreated since the cover art has been reveled as well as the track listing along with the release date, i now believe it meets with WP:NALBUMS.
Link to cover and tracklisting below : "[1]". Please share your thoughts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by L-l-CLK-l-l (talk • contribs) 07:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: The original discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Songs_From_The_Tainted_Cherry_Tree. I42 (talk)
- Endorse close. WP:NALBUMS states "unreleased albums are in general not notable; however, they may be notable if they have significant independent coverage in reliable sources" and "Separate articles should not be created until there is sufficient reliably sourced information about a future release". Merely having a release date, tracklisting and cover art does not demonstrate significant independent coverage. I would be willing to reconsider if sufficient independent coverage is located - all I could find was primary, retailer info (not sufficiently independent), or a single piece in the Daily Telegraph which was an interview with Vickers so still not really independent. Most coverage appears to be interested in the single. There is no hurry; this article can be restored when the album in released next month - and in the meantime it can be developed in readiness at Wikipedia:Article_Incubator/Songs_From_The_Tainted_Cherry_Tree. I42 (talk) 10:32, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- For the avoidance of doubt - the references cited by Hobit, below, are not the sufficient independent coverage I was hoping for. The articles are all about the artist and her single, and quote Vickers herself, who obviously has a record to promote. The mentions of the album are in passing, or primary, or both - they do not seem to anything like the "significant independent coverage" that is required. Now, an independent review of the album itself from a major source would be different - and as of today such a thing does seem to exist, at the BBC. It's not a favourable review, but it is a review - and I think it tips the edge towards notability. I42 (talk) 19:39, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Endorse but allow recreation [2], [3], [4], [5]m [6], [7] etc. would seem to meet WP:N. signed late: Hobit (talk) 14:01, 22 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
|
