Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Singles Collection (Britney Spears album) (2nd nomination)

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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:09, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The Singles Collection (Britney Spears album)

This article should be deleted because it has no sources. Not only that, but the article clearly states it is from a fansite, and it is a rumored album. No reason to have the article if it isn't confirmed. Not only that, but everyone you claims it is real, can not even back it up with a reliable source. ---Shadow (talk) 04:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment it is a very popular rumour with thousands of google hits. Note that there is a singles collection for 2007 as well as this article on the possible 2009 album. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:04, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't change the fact that there is no source to back it up. ---Shadow (talk) 16:12, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question where is the first nomination? Graeme Bartlett (talk) 21:33, 21 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per
WP:CRYSTAL. The 2nd nom is weird indeed. Hekerui (talk) 00:35, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Question There are now reliable sources such as LiveJournal and even Sony BMG ITSELF confirming that it exists and will be released! So why do you delete those reliable and real sources and paste on the deletion nomination, claiming no-one has found a reliable source? Sorry, but last time I read WIKIPEDIA FOR DUMMIES, it stated that Sony BMG was a reliable source. The Rogue Leader (talk) 11:30, 23 July, 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Please don't be insulted, I wasn't calling you a dummy.

LiveJournal is not a reliable source, and the site you linked to (Britney Bash, which is also NOT a reliable source) claims they added it, yet the site doesn't even link as proof, nor do you. ---Shadow (talk) 02:18, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, makes sense. How about this: Continue with deletion plans, and if Sony BMG directly announces its release, a senior editor will re-add the page? The Rogue Leader (talk) 14:20, 23 July, 2009 (UTC)

That's what I'm pushing for. Unless a record label or Britney's website confirms it, there is no reason for this page to be here. ---Shadow (talk) 10:44, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

But even if it is not official, but reliable sources start to cover the rumour, then we could have an article on the rumour or notable hoax! Graeme Bartlett (talk) 11:11, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is need for a page on the rumour. On the

Light & Darkness & Celebration (Madonna album) have all been confirmed. This hasn't. Like I've said before, there is no harm in deleting it. In fact, that'll resolve the argument and whatever the future holds, then there'll be no complication. If we keep the page, things WILL get complicated, confusing & nasty when Sony announces either that the rumours are true or that there going to kill the idiot who started the rumour. The Rogue Leader (talk

) 21:56, 23 July, 2009 (UTC)

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- the wub "?!" 13:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - as per above. As soon as the record label confirms it, it'll be an article with good legs to stand on! Panyd^{The muffin is not subtle} 20:51, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, fails notability per
WP:MUSIC#Albums. Even if it was released, it doesn't automatically make the album notable. Esradekan Gibb ^"Klat" 13:46, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete - per
WP:CRYSTAL, at list until officially confirmed. Rlendog (talk) 19:14, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Delete. "The Singles Collection is a rumoured greatest hits album…" If that doesn't scream
crystal balling, I don't know what does. — Σxplicit 22:41, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply
]

Hear, Hear (Or Aye or Agreed, whatever) The Rogue Leader (talk) 14:20, 27 July, 2009 (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.