Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 in music
although it needs editing - I don't like the premise behind this article as it currently reads.  I don't think album or DVD releases or planned tours fall under  as long as its clear that those dates are proposed and not set in stone.  For example, knowing the Rolling Stones are going on tour in March is no less notable on Dec. 31 than January 1.  And we do have List of 2018 albums, which to me is perfectly fine.  Knowing what we have to look forward to is convenient.  The LA Times and NY Times have seasonal preview sections for the arts. All good and notable.  What bothers me instead is the structure of this article, and the assumptions made by the template.  Certain countries and certain genres are listed, whether they have articles or not.  Who gets to decide that there should be these 28 countries and these 13 genres? Is the quest to communicate knowledge just limited to filling in the red blanks, or do we want to approach music with an open mind? I'd much prefer to see the article start somewhat blank, and build organically as music is recorded and released.  My recommended edits are to remove everything that is redlinked - that does violate . Also, the IP voting 5 times in this AfD and proclaiming that he's found consensus also rubs me a bit the wrong way, but I'm still going with keep
— User:timtempleton, 23:51, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:NOTFUTURE||WP:NOTFUTURE (Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not)