Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nas' ninth studio album

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 as crystal balling. Fram 11:46, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Nas' ninth studio album

Nas' ninth studio album (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

No bias against constructing a real article under this album's real title when such is known, but for now this article has almost no real information, and what little is there is very much in the realm of WP:CRYSTAL. For now, with this little useful information availible, an aricle like this is IMHO not particularly useful either. TexasAndroid 20:13, 20 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete Yeah, Released at a time according to himself without any real confirmations and not a lot of info.--JForget 00:19, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - It may be released within the 3 month so it should be kept IMO. West Coast Ryda and Talk to Me 17:17, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - I think it should be kept, as we could add more info about the album as we get it. I don't see the point in deleting it if we are just going to recreate it within afew weeks or so - keep it real - Real Compton G - Holla back 19:38, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - Why should this be deleted? it's only speculation. Nas himself announced he would have an album out probably towards the end of this year. there are no statements of fact in this wikipedia entry. the only thing i can think of the fact that album is given the name "Rhymebook" on the main Nas page (which i think Nas hasn't named). Other than that, whats the deal? the info will change soon enough when things are more concrete. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.239.38.85 (talk) 20:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Heh. You are arguing that totally that this entry violates WP:CRYSTAL, which was one of my original reasons for deletions. :) - TexasAndroid 20:56, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - U serious? if this is crystall ball then what 'bout "Before I Self Destruct" or Fabolous' fifth studio album and those? And their release time is a year away while this one is just about 2,3 month away. So what is the fact deal? West Coast Ryda and Talk to Me 10:26, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Please read WP:OTHERSTUFF. And I'll look into those other links within the next few days and see if they deserve AFD as well. Thanks for pointing out other things that may deserve deletion. - TexasAndroid 18:25, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

Actually, Before I Self Destruct has been confirmed to be released March 2008, and has sources. He already completed 12 tracks for the album. --- Who's the one you call Mr. Macho? The head honcho, swift fist like Camacho 01:15, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that justifies keeping an entry for Before I Self Destruct...but I think I have to send Fabolous' fifth studio album into AFD, as that article's got pretty much the same problems as this article has now. --Andrewlp1991 16:41, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - actually before i self destruct doesent deserve deletion as the users has done a pretty hard work to get it as good as u may see them now. but the fabolous' article is pretty little. West Coast Ryda and Talk to Me 18:50, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete for now Until something is officially confirmed. An artist simply saying they're going to release an album is not enough. Wait until more information comes out. It's too crystal-bally as it stands. Spellcast 08:40, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete - it can be recreated when reliable sources actually exists -- Whpq 17:39, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

• Keep - Real sources do exist, and several have already been cited. What more do you need? Deleting this page is silly. User:dcAjn2319:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.52.224.72 (talk)

• Delete - The only 'source' listed is Nas and we all know that he is unreliable with information on his own albums. It should be deleted until official word is given from the record label and title is given with more information. The information on the article now should only be on the Nas article.--Sosa 14:46, 26 September 2007 (UTC)
• Delete for now until there comes at least a true release date and confirmation from Def Jam Recordings. I, having edited this article before, now see this as reptition of stuff from the main Nas article. --Andrewlp1991 16:41, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• Delete : 6
• Keep :4

It has been voted that this page be deleted until official confirmation and information on the album has been verified and referenced. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Samil20 (talk • contribs) 05:01, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

I agree this should be deleted for now. But Wikipedia is not a democracy. You can have 10 keep votes and 2 delete votes and a page could still end up deleted based on the arguments. Spellcast 11:32, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

comment - one whouldn't put up tally counters as per Afd etiquette. An admin will weight arguments put forth and close the issue as appropriate. -- Whpq 15:33, 27 September 2007 (UTC)

• Comment - Even coming from Nas this is just speculation. Nas has also talked about Lost Tapes 2, doing an all DJ Premier produced album, Nasdaq Dow Jones, working with Rakim, just to name a few. Point is just because Nas said it, it shouldn't be taken as fact. Deletion for now until more reliable information arrives. P.S. we all know that everytime Nas says its coming, its always pushed back 100% of the time.--Sosa 15:49, 27 September 2007 (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.