Talk:2U (David Guetta song)

Requested move 10 June 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure). Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:38, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

---

2U (David Guetta song) → 2U (song) – Vacant title and visitors would go to the title to see the "David Guetta song" not anything else. - TheMagnificentist 16:27, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). TonyBallioni (talk) 16:31, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

• TheMagnificentist, the redirect currently targets a different song, so it should probably be discussed before a move is made. TonyBallioni (talk) 16:31, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose - I don't think that there is a primary topic here. Also, I retargeted 2U (song) to 2U, the disambiguation page. RileyBugz^会話_投稿記録 16:37, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose - WP:PTOPIC doesn't apply here. カビル (talk) 17:10, 10 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose per above, but if someone wants to merge/delete the other song article (2U (Keshia Chante song)) which has been unsourced stub since its creation 10 years ago, then move would be in order. (Note that this article formerly occupied the 2U [song] until it was moved after a gaze into a crystal ball — "David Guetta's new song with the same name is about to become a global smash".) —  AjaxSmack  15:25, 11 June 2017 (UTC)
  • I hate to say this, but WP:IAR applies here. Considering David Guetta's chart history, it's appropriate to estimate that a David Guetta song would overtake that other song upon release. feminist 02:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

• Oppose – They're two completely different songs that came out during different time periods, so they should stay as is right now. I just had the other article moved where it belonged and I would hate to have my work undone. 76.116.198.27 (talk) 20:59, 11 June 2017 (UTC)

• Comment AfD started for the other song article at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2U (Keshia Chante song). Support if that article is deleted or redirected, oppose if not, per WP:SONGDAB. feminist 02:35, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose 2U (Keshia Chante song) charted and deleting it just because David Guetta has released a song yesterday is WP:RECENT in the extreme. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:13, 12 June 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose if 2U (Keshia Chante song) is kept at AfD, as removing it would make the title WP:PARTIALDAB which should be avoided. If the Chante song is deleted or redirected, then support move per WP:SONGDAB.--Cúchullain ^t/c 13:35, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Music video

@Beachey23: claimed that this wasn't the the official video, despite the fact that multiple sources ([1][2][3][4][5][6][7]) have said that it's the official music video. There are actually two music videos in total, one of them is currently unreleased, to quote David Guetta: "We're probably going to do two music videos. But that's one of the videos, yeah." ([8]) I really have now idea how you came up with "this is not the official video", not really in the mood to edit war over this. Hayman30 (talk) 12:20, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Even Guetta cant himself say that this is the official video. This is a regular promo lipsync. When the official comes, we will add it to the infobox but for now you can keep this as (Victoria's Secret Lipsync) in the External links.--Beachey23 (talk) 12:27, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Beachey23: This is the official video. Did you actually read what I wrote? Hayman30 (talk) 12:29, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I read the quote. He didn't say this is THE official video. Even lyric videos are technically music videos but we never add them to the infobox. This isn't an official music video.--Beachey23 (talk) 12:31, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Beachey23: That interview was published before the song was released, the quote was to show you that it's one of the two music videos. If what came out of his mouth is not official, I don't really know what on Earth is official. And we don't have to and shouldn't rely on his words, as long as multiple reliable sources claimed that it's a music video, it is the official music video. FYI, the external music video template can be used multiple times in an infobox, we can also fit two YouTube templates inside. Hayman30 (talk) 12:41, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I really don't have any more time to spend on this. But I suggest you consult a few more users incase you plan on adding it back. I wont be back.--Beachey23 (talk) 12:45, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Beachey23: You just can't make a point. And: you're the only one who's having issues with it, who should I consult? Hayman30 (talk) 12:46, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Do What U Want.--Beachey23 (talk) 12:52, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Beachey23: We would've edit warred over this if I actually go ahead and do what I want. Hayman30 (talk) 12:54, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

I wont revert you again but I still don't agree with it.--Beachey23 (talk) 12:58, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

@Beachey23: What are you not understanding? We could continue debating on this if you wish, I have time and would love to seek consensus. Hayman30 (talk) 13:03, 16 June 2017 (UTC)

Requested move 4 July 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved. MBisanz is still off-wiki, since my relist comment below, and there is no deletion review currently active. If the other article is ever recreated for any reason, the position of this song can be re-evaluated.  — Amakuru (talk) 09:59, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

---

2U (David Guetta song) → 2U (song) – Now that the Keshia Chanté song has been redirected to 2U (album), would it be appropriate to move this page now? 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:704B:8C4:B7C8:5EDF (talk) 12:52, 4 July 2017 (UTC) --Relisting.  — Amakuru (talk) 20:53, 12 July 2017 (UTC)

• Support - Sole song which bears this name and has its own page on the project. Hayman30 (talk) 13:03, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
• Support per requester. - TheMagnificentist 13:08, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
• Support per WP:SONGDAB. With no other ambiguous articles left now, the shorter dab is appropriate.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:02, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
• Comment Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2U (Keshia Chante song) a Top 20 hit single was targeted for deletion because this new June 2017 (David Guetta song) was suffering the shame of having the name of the artist on it. Despite a 3:2 opposing deletion, it was still deleted. So the sources from 10 years ago are deprecated, so what the song was still notable. In ictu oculi (talk) 16:40, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose and I agree with the previous user about Keshia Chanté's song; I would like it recreated with more on it than it used to have. 100.37.51.244 (talk) 21:15, 4 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I generally believe that the names of artists should be included in the titles of articles about their songs and albums. That makes the titles more clear and recognizable, and avoids future maintenance headaches over whether to consider some particular song or album as primary. Including the name of the artist is helpful to readers, the popularity of music is volatile, and new releases often appear with the same names (or strings of lyrics that might be mistaken for a name). IMHO, there is basically negative value in making song and album articles more ambiguous by removing the names of the artists from their titles. In many cases, we can easily discover that there are already several other songs with the same name that are covered on Wikipedia. The Keshia Chante song seems just as notable. This article really says very little about its topic. It is mostly a collection of chart statistics. For example, it contains no commentary from critics and no mention of how the song represents some milestone in the career of the artist. —BarrelProof (talk) 21:26, 6 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Oppose per the two reasons above. I am going to talk to the user who closed the request about why he made the decision to choose the minority vote and help expand the page if it is recreated. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:F4A6:F4C1:BBA9:214B (talk) 14:06, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
    • As before, I'd support the article staying put if there were another ambiguous article, but per WP:SONGDAB, we do not add the artist name if there are no other articles on songs of the same name, so it's pretty open and shut here.--Cúchullain ^t/c 14:32, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
      • I invited MBisanz to comment on this; I would like to see what he says before we make a decision. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:F4A6:F4C1:BBA9:214B (talk) 14:41, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
  • It was actually 3:3 (including nominator) and I think it was closed due to lack of coverage. Meeting MUSICBIO doesn't necessarily guarantee inclusion. Another possible reason, is because the voters said "oppose" not "keep". "Oppose" can also mean "oppose deletion" and that's what MBisanz probably thought when he closed it. - TheMagnificentist 14:51, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
    • I do not believe the nominator's opinion is supposed to count towards the decision, which is why I say it was 3:2. I'd still like to hear from MBisanz. 2601:8C:4001:DCB9:F4A6:F4C1:BBA9:214B (talk) 14:57, 7 July 2017 (UTC)
• Relisting comment - leaving this open for now, to give MBisanz time to respond to the query on their talk page. (Note that they have been off-wiki since 5 July, so if they don't return then we'll just have to close this, or defer it if a deletion review is opened. For the record, the split was 3:3. We always include nominators as supporting the deletion (or supporting the move, if it's here at RM), unless they explicitly declare themselves as either neutral or opposed. THanks  — Amakuru (talk) 20:53, 12 July 2017 (UTC)
• Support as removal of unnecessary disambiguation (assuming the other song article isn't recreated). Pppery 17:05, 13 July 2017 (UTC)
• Double-sided – I say for now I guess it would be okay to move the page for now, but if the other page ends up getting recreated (before or after this request closes), then this should be moved back to 2U (David Guetta song). 174.201.10.223 (talk) 19:52, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Keshia Chanté Song

In case anyone is interested, I am attempting to recreate the article for the Keshia Chanté song. I encourage any user to edit Draft:2U (Keshia Chanté song). JE98 (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

That article is just hopeless. Old song with not many sources at all. If nothing much can be found on Google then it's unlikely for anything to be found in other places (books, news). — Zawl 13:50, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

@JE98: It apparently fails WP:NSONG at current state. Hayman30 (talk) 13:53, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

I agree to that, but I really would like to have it expanded if anyone is interested. JE98 (talk) 12:52, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

@JE98: I'd love to help but I literally couldn't find anything on Google. Hayman30 (talk) 12:55, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

@Hayman30: That's alright, and this is a project I don't expect to be done for a while. The way I feel: if you can find more stuff, great, if not, no surprise. JE98 (talk) 12:57, 27 August 2017 (UTC)