User:Sam S/central

GA nominations

Albums

This includes record albums, soundtracks, and video albums.

Lucid (Aṣa album) (talk | history | discuss review) (1 review, 10 GAs) Versace1608 (talk) 20:14, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Review: this article is being reviewed (additional comments are welcome). (1 review, 0 GAs) BlondArkhangel (talk) 06:25, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Born in the U.S.A. (talk | history | start review) (39 reviews, 75 GAs) Zmbro (talk) 14:59, 15 May 2024 (UTC)
Note: Co-nominated with Moisejp
Something Else from The Move (talk | history | start review) (0 reviews, 13 GAs) VirreFriberg (talk) 02:23, 27 May 2024 (UTC)
Life Cycle (Sakerock album) (talk | history | start review) (9 reviews, 8 GAs) IanTEB (talk) 21:43, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Horses (album) (talk | history | start review) (1 review, 6 GAs) Holiday56 (talk) 02:34, 5 August 2024 (UTC)
Nominator inactive for 22 days
A Storm in Heaven (talk | history | start review) (0 reviews, 13 GAs) MusicforthePeople (talk) 13:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
Songs from How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying (talk | history | start review) – 2012 EP by Nick Jonas – (0 reviews, 1 GA) Artmanha (talk) 01:36, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
People...Hold On (talk | history | start review) (3 reviews, 3 GAs) Reppop (talk) 15:51, 12 September 2024 (UTC)
80's Ladies (talk | history | start review) (0 reviews, 0 GAs) HereIGoAgain (talk) 02:01, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
Note: The article was re-nominated due to an error in prose, spelling that caused the GA nomination (at that time) to fail and has been subsequently addressed in a copyedit request, fixing those issues.
The Feminine Divine (talk | history | start review) (142 reviews, 130 GAs) BennyOnTheLoose (talk) 16:12, 27 September 2024 (UTC)
Blood & Chocolate (talk | history | start review) (39 reviews, 75 GAs) Zmbro (talk) 21:01, 4 October 2024 (UTC)
An Evening with Silk Sonic (talk | history | start review) (207 reviews, 49 GAs) MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:12, 12 October 2024 (UTC)
Gula Gula (talk | history | start review) (383 reviews, 652 GAs) Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:26, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Solar Power (album) (talk | history | start review) (0 reviews, 26 GAs) De88 (talk) 04:13, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Songs

This includes songs from any era.

Stronger (Kanye West song) (talk | history | start review) – 2007 single by Kanye West – (589 reviews, 98 GAs) Kyle Peake (talk) 14:00, 18 May 2024 (UTC)
I Wonder (Kanye West song) (talk | history | start review) (589 reviews, 98 GAs) Kyle Peake (talk) 20:21, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Cómo Se Cura una Herida (talk | history | start review) (10 reviews, 111 GAs) Magiciandude (talk) 22:53, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
Zari (song) (talk | history | start review) – 2024 song by Marina Satti – (0 reviews, 12 GAs) Nascar9919 (talk) 04:57, 19 June 2024 (UTC)
Not in Love (Crystal Castles song) (talk | history | start review) (18 reviews, 35 GAs) Skyshifter (talk) 22:16, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
The American Dream Is Killing Me (talk | history | start review) – 2023 single by Green Day – (1 review, 2 GAs) Leafy46 (talk) 18:11, 1 August 2024 (UTC)
Outside (Mariah Carey song) (talk | history | start review) (19 reviews, 7 GAs) Heartfox (talk) 20:35, 10 August 2024 (UTC)
I'm in It (talk | history | start review) (589 reviews, 98 GAs) Kyle Peake (talk) 21:21, 12 August 2024 (UTC)
I Wanna Be Your Ghost (talk | history | start review) – 2022 single by Gen Hoshino – (9 reviews, 8 GAs) IanTEB (talk) 17:51, 19 August 2024 (UTC)
Stayaway (talk | history | start review) – 2919 song by American band Muna – (6 reviews, 57 GAs) Changedforbetter (talk) 18:59, 21 August 2024 (UTC)
Moon (Kanye West song) (talk | history | start review) (589 reviews, 98 GAs) Kyle Peake (talk) 20:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
Bottle Pop (talk | history | start review) (0 reviews, 3 GAs) MrHyacinth (talk) 00:19, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
If I Thought You'd Ever Change Your Mind (talk | history | start review) – Song written by John Cameron – (0 reviews, 13 GAs) VirreFriberg (talk) 21:29, 10 October 2024 (UTC)
Marching Through Georgia (talk | history | start review) – American marching song by Henry Clay Work – (0 reviews, 0 GAs) DannyRogers800 (talk) 22:21, 13 October 2024 (UTC)
H.A.M. (talk | history | start review) (589 reviews, 98 GAs) Kyle Peake (talk) 13:08, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
Girl, So Confusing (talk | history | start review) – 2024 promotional single by Charli XCX and Lorde – (0 reviews, 26 GAs) De88 (talk) 20:35, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Talk That Talk (Twice song) (talk | history | start review) (0 reviews, 5 GAs) Lililolol (talk) 19:44, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Every Night (Hannah Diamond song) (talk | history | start review) (18 reviews, 35 GAs) Skyshifter (talk) 13:02, 27 October 2024 (UTC)
Cherry on Top (Bini song) (talk | history | discuss review) – 2024 single by Bini – (4 reviews, 0 GAs) Royiswariii (talk) 11:58, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Review: this article is being reviewed (additional comments are welcome). (1 review, 0 GAs) RFNirmala (talk) 10:02, 3 November 2024 (UTC)
Kyu-Kurarin (talk | history | start review) (0 reviews, 0 GAs) Nux-vomica 1007 (talk) 00:38, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
My Boy Only Breaks His Favorite Toys (talk | history | start review) – 2024 song by Taylor Swift – (38 reviews, 67 GAs) Ippantekina (talk) 08:15, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Fate ((G)I-dle song) (talk | history | start review) (0 reviews, 5 GAs) Lililolol (talk) 01:10, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
The Black Dog (song) (talk | history | discuss review) – 2024 song by Taylor Swift – (2 reviews, 24 GAs) Gained (talk) 08:25, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
On hold: this article is awaiting improvements before it is passed or failed. (11 reviews, 1 GA) Medxvo (talk) 09:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Pink Pony Club (talk | history | start review) – 2020 single by Chappell Roan – (0 reviews, 12 GAs) Nascar9919 (talk) 03:08, 2 November 2024 (UTC)
Unicorn (song) (talk | history | start review) – 2023 song by Noa Kirel – (0 reviews, 12 GAs) Nascar9919 (talk) 18:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Deletion candidates

Tha Carter albums

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I'm having a hard time finding reliable sources that discuss Lil Wayne's Tha Carter albums as a series or a set. A ranking by Vibe and XXL Mag is pretty much it. The albums have been released in a period over two decades, with not thematic coherence. This seems WP:SYNTHy and unnecessary. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 10:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 10:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep. [1][2][3]... Fram (talk) 10:29, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

The Guardian again is a ranking, best to worst. The Billboard piece is a listicle of "Black Music Milestones", is three paragraphs long and mentions charting positions and sales. Doesn't discuss the albums as a series. UDiscoverMusic isn't listed at WP:MUSICRS and mostly talks about the first Tha Carter, not about the series as a whole. Where do reliable sources discuss the Tha Carter albums as a series, beyond the fact they got the same title? What makes Tha Carter Lil Wayne's Berlin Trilogy? As a series, what is its meaning, its cultural impact, its legacy? soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 11:11, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Leaning towards redirecting and/or draftifying. It's probably a viable search term. Not sure we need a ~~third~~ fourth location beyond the artist, individual album, and artist discography articles to discuss it. If there is a need, this article certainly doesn't demonstrate. It's basically just a (incomplete) list of release dates and singles. Put it back in the oven and let it cook. These albums have been out for years. There's no reason someone needed to sloppily rush this out yesterday. Sergecross73 msg me 12:22, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Delete - A completely unnecessary synthesis of four different albums that all have their own articles and are not a distinct "set" or "series" just because they have titles in common. An article that ranks them against each other is pretty much a trivia exercise for reader enjoyment; see this example of how writers can compare anything to anything without the items being a distinct collective entity. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:55, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
- That's very dismissive. The artist treats them as a set, e.g. releasing specifically the singles from the albums as if they belong together[4]. Here is another article from a RS purely about the series[5]. Fram (talk) 14:15, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Why would releasing the singles together mean Lil Wayne treats them as a such "as if they belong together"? Could you elaborate? And while that would be interesting, an artist's own views on their work are secondary to how reliable sources consider it. The Vulture piece is more in depth though, but I'm not convinced as of yet. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 14:25, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

That first part was just a reply to the weird claim that they "are not a distinct "set" or "series" just because they have titles in common." The artist considers them as a series, as evidenced by the titles (duh) but also by specifically releasing the singles from these albums together, as if they belong together somehow. While I have no issue with the discussion about whether they are notable as a series and whether they should have a separate article or not, I was rather amazed about the claim that they aren't even a series. But the singles set is not an argument for or against deletion, the Vulture article (which you commented upon, thanks) is an argument against deletion and pro notability. Fram (talk) 14:36, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Disagree all you want on whether or not it's a "series" but that's the wrong argument. That ignores the much more precise Wikipedia policy cited by the nominator and myself: WP:SYNTH. As currently written, the article has nothing on what makes the albums a distinct collective entity, and merely lists release dates and singles and producers and guests stars. All info is repeated from the respective individual album articles. Any media article comparing/ranking them as a group is trivia as said above. Many of the article's existing sources are unreliable fansites and blogs, and the few reliable sources are about individual albums or songs. Recurring lyrical themes are valid but can be explained at Lil Wayne's article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:56, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

I don't really care about the sources in the article or the state of the article, that's not what AfD is about in general, unless it is so egregious that WP:TNT (or in less severe cases draftification) are the best solution. There are plenty of reliable sources treating these albums as a series (and yes, even ranking them means that people consider them a series, something related and comparable and at the same time distinct from the things not listed), and the Vulture article goes way indepth about them, treating them as a separate, important, aspect of his total oeuvre worth discussing as a group: "his Carter records occupy a specific place in his staggering discography [...] But what can looking back at the previous four installments tell us about Wayne as an artist? About how he’s evolved, and what his entire career means?" (that article calls them a "series" and "a project" as well). Fram (talk) 15:16, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

For what it's worth, my comment above is rooted in multiple aspects of WP:MERGEREASON, conceptually. There just probably wouldn't much actual merging because I imagine much of this was aped from already existing articles in better shape. Sergecross73 msg me 15:43, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Alas Agnes

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article about a song, not properly referenced as having any serious claim to passing WP:NSONGS. As always, songs are not automatically entitled to have Wikipedia articles just because they exist -- the notability bar for songs requires evidence of their cultural significance (charting, awards, sufficient coverage and analysis about the song in reliable sources to get it over WP:GNG, etc.) -- but existence is the only notability claim being attempted here, and the article is completely unreferenced for the purposes of establishing that it would pass GNG. Bearcat (talk) 14:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Bearcat (talk) 14:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Redirect to Making Dens: also found no evidence of notability. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:14, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

DSU Fight Song

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article clearly violates WP:NOTLYRICS. The song itself fails WP:NSONG as I cannot find any reliable source talking about it. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 09:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and South Dakota. Warm Regards, Miminity (Talk?) (me contribs) 09:22, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Delete per nom. I also searched and couldn't find independent reliable sources discussing this song. Left guide (talk) 11:21, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Delete in agreement with the nominator and previous voter. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:37, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Delete - per WP:NOTLYRICS. Sergecross73 msg me 14:06, 7 November 2024 (UTC)
Delete I see trivial mention on the school's marketing page, but I feel it's too thin to be worthy of a re-direct. If there was somewhat more coverage outside of the school's website, I'd feel comfortable with a re-direct to the school's relevant department (athletic, band, music, or whatever), but at this point, there's no suitable target. Graywalls (talk) 18:21, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

Electric Nebraska

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This article, separated from Nebraska, gives the impression that the album was an actual record that was shelved and is sitting in the vault, which is not the case. Springsteen felt these recordings, which were the Nebraska songs in "electric" renditions with the E Street Band, did not capture the mood and feelings of his initial demos, which became Nebraska. I am currently rewriting the Nebraska article in my sandbox and there's only one paragraph on the "electric" version. Yes, there are quite a few sources that cover the "electric" recordings, but these renditions will be covered in the new expansion, and are already partially covered in Born in the U.S.A.. They do not warrant their own article, especially in its current state, which gives the impression that they were considered for release in 1982. (Springsteen, very briefly, considered combining the acoustic and electric stuff in a double album but decided to release the acoustic ones on their own to give them "greater stature".) – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 16:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Keep for now—Zmbro, you really love your massive rewrites and wholesale publishing overrides of Bowie and Springsteen album articles, instead of choosing the collaborative method of making smaller or shorter edits, allowing stuff to breathe, and having other editors weigh in. This is the second AfD that I can recall where part of your rationale seems to be "I'm rewriting this" or "I intend to rewrite this"—you seem to often just skirt OWNERSHIP issues with these DB and BS articles. I read the Hyden book when it came out, and confess that I forget how many pages he spent discussing the electric sessions (and the Marsh and Heylin books were years ago). But at the risk of turning this into a general comment, you may want to reevaluate your editing mindset... Cheers. Caro7200 (talk) 17:27, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Slightly hurtful... but I'm certainly not the only editor on WP to rewrite articles soon their own before publishing. When I do rewrite, I try to keep as much of the old content as possible as long as it's useful. In the case of the Nebraska article in its current state, quite a bit of it has non-encyclopedic writing, on top of being sourced by entire books and not specific pages. In those instances I'm basically forced to start anew. Furthermore, it's best to write these articles wholesale so everything flows organically and there is a consistent writing style; obviously, WP is a collaborative place but quite a lot of articles actually read like they were written by 20 different people. I will admit, I did have ownership issues when I first started doing this, but I do think that has gotten better. To me, this is a much easier process than sitting around waiting for other editors to try to chime in, especially for artists like Elvis Costello, who has much less fans than Bowie or Springsteen, or even Duran Duran. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 15:33, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:09, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Merge to Nebraska (album): coverage is minimal, scope is limited, target article already has a significant amount of information on this and plenty of room for more. Zmbro's draft/future edits to the page should be outside the scope of this AfD, and I have no opinion on them. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:18, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
Merge to Nebraska (album) - I have no idea why it's necessary to rewrite that entire album article, which has been honed over many years by dozens of competent editors. But for Electric Nebraska I agree with the previous voter. There are only fan rumors that this collection of songs may someday be released as a distinct album, and an album article in WP should be based on a distinct item for current or near-future purchase, or a fully prepared album that was totally cancelled. Here we have session recordings that didn't make it to the album, just like outtakes and leftovers that occur at any recording session. The saga can be covered adequately at the main album article. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:44, 5 November 2024 (UTC)
I'm not rewriting the ENTIRE thing; as I stated above, I try to keep as much content from the old versions as I can when I start these projects. In this album's case, however, much of the recording content and such were sourced using entire books rather than specific pages; when I don't own the sources in question, I basically have to restart from there. – zmbro _{(talk) (cont)} 15:40, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Having looked at your sandbox version of the Nebraska article, I can say that you're certainly doing informative and well-cited work there. The problem is that the easiest way to move your content to the main article is lots of copy/pasting, in which case you would erase a lot of work by previous editors that merely needs to be improved rather than eradicated. If you're planning much more intricate updates and additions to the existing text, that would be a more community-oriented strategy. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:06, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Trafalgar Street (album)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Reference is an opinion piece and there aren't other sources for this album, the band's article itself is barely referenced and seems to be taken from a no longer active website. Smallangryplanet (talk) 08:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Christianity. Smallangryplanet (talk) 08:42, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 11:48, 4 November 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Revive (band). Some of this band's other albums received multiple pro reviews in Christian Rock publications like Jesus Freak Hideout and Cross Rhythms. I can find no dedicated reviews for this album and it is only briefly mentioned in the magazine article that is used as a source. However, that is not merely an "opinion" piece as said by the nominator. There are also possibiities for improving the band's article, the current state of which is not relevant for this album-only discussion. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:47, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

I have added some improvements to the band's article. See WP:NEXIST on how to not condemn an article after looking at it just briefly. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 15:21, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Music to Scream To

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Too limited in coverage. Out of the sources here, two are announcements (one focused more on the graphic novel with little to say about the soundtrack), two are profiles that only briefly mention this release (one gives a small paragraph and the other just a sentence), and the review from Sputnik which has never given me the most confidence as a source. And having found nothing else, I don't see notability met. I suggest a redirect to Poppy (singer)#2019–2020: I Disagree where the subject is mentioned in prose, with potential to merge and expand it to its own paragraph. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:37, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 19:37, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Static/Crash

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Can't find any reliable sources covering the album (Google search). The only coverage mentioning the album title is this short music blog post and it's not significant coverage, just a passing mention. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 17:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Canada. Dan Leonard (talk • contribs) 17:20, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Redirect to The Mark Inside. I found two reviews from Exclaim! ([6], [7]), a review from The Coast (newspaper) ([8]), and a few sentences about the album in a NOW article about the lead singer and guitarist ([9]). But all of that coverage is too brief to be significant. toweli (talk) 19:24, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. toweli (talk) 19:30, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

This overall doesn't meet notability. Cyberpower7 (talk) 19:37, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete and/or redirect. This, once again, is an old holdover from a time when Wikipedia extended an automatic presumption of notability to any album recorded by a notable band regardless of its sourcing or lack thereof, in the name of completionist directoryism — but that's long since been overturned, and an album now has to get over WP:GNG on its own steam. Bearcat (talk) 20:45, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

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. Hey man im josh (talk) 17:19, 8 November 2024 (UTC)

2 Hands (song)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

WP:TOOSOON. A single instagram post does not confer notability(!). Searche do not come up with anything. TheLongTone (talk) 14:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete per nomination, all I can find on it is social media announcements and a few passing mentions in RS, nothing that meets WP:NSONG. The usual solution for this is to redirect to the album, but a new one hasn't been announced yet. The correct title of 2 Hands already redirects to Tate McRae discography, so if the song charts or otherwise becomes notable after its release, then that redirect should be expanded, rather than this one. Wikishovel (talk) 15:09, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Skynxnex (talk) 15:48, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete per above. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:57, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete: TOOSOON indeed and this is the only media mention I can find. [10]. No notability at this time. Oaktree b (talk) 21:18, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Strong Keep The song can be kept as an article until it is released as a single and then can be expanded on. I see no reason to delete the article when the song is releasing in only a week and will clearly chart well as it is a follow up of a top 20 US Billboard Hot 100 single. Oh and as for the redirect, it can be removed to redirect to this article and this article can also be moved as well.This0k (talk) 12:54, 6 November 2024 (UTC)
Strong KeepBold per above. 79.152.21.189 (talk) 16:05, 7 November 2024 (UTC) — 79.152.21.189 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Delete per above. No notability and no coverage so far outside of the announcement and the artwork. Lk95 (talk) 12:46, 8 November 2024 (UTC)
Delete: Fails WP:NSINGLE. Vanderwaalforces (talk) 16:00, 8 November 2024 (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.

Tooth & Nail Records discography

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I don't believe it passes WP:LSC WP:NLIST., because this is essentially a product "catalog" of a record label, which is a publisher. Graywalls (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Companies, Products, and Lists. Graywalls (talk) 19:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep - Record label discography lists are useful and common. Since the label itself is notable, I'd argue the set of releases is notable. Since it is too large to roll into the main article, it makes sense to retain as a standalone list. glman (talk) 20:17, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

~~Withdrawing my hasty thoughts for more reflection. glman (talk) 20:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)~~

Restoring my original opinion. glman (talk) 18:24, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep. Discographical information is encyclopedic and necessary for robust coverage of bands and labels. This is, unquestionably, a notable record label. The size of the list does mean it makes sense to have as a standalone article, though a merge is also an option. Chubbles (talk) 07:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Comment Just a refresher on a relevant discussion from the past Wikipedia_talk:What_Wikipedia_is_not/Archive_59#WP:NOTDIRECTORY,_NOTWEBHOST_for_companies_and_bios which didn't find consensus on exhaustive product catalog for publishers. So, simply splitting off as "product catalog of a publisher" standalone seems like getting around the loophole.*:Graywalls (talk) 07:30, 30 October 2024 (UTC)
Lists of "product catalogs of publishers" are routinely notable if the "product" is art. We have, and certainly should have, (attempts at) full catalog lists of publishers like Warner Bros., Pixar, Square, and Motown. If the label is notable, we should cover its artistic output encyclopedically, and that includes discographical information. Chubbles (talk) 01:27, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Please link to guidelines, or discussions corroborating this, thank you. Graywalls (talk) 01:49, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
We have never had debates about whether a Pixar movie or Final Fantasy game is a "product". Of course it is a product, but of course that is besides the point. Covering them here in the encyclopedia is covering art history. So, too, is covering Christian rock and emo and metalcore released by an impactful, significant, influential label. Chubbles (talk) 14:24, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Comment - Lists such as these are useful for sure. However, they must still meet WP:NLIST by having significant coverage that discusses the discography as a group. Are these sources available? --CNMall41 (talk) 20:42, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Comment If we allow things on basis of one person saying "useful" there will be someone saying anything is useful. We'll end up with a "list of Signature Select condiments" and end up with an exhaustive list of their products with Safeway.com as the reference, or the "items sold at Home Depot" and end up with exhaustive list of SKUs. Some hole in the wall record labels are not held sacred over else and I think we shouldn't have product catalogs of this nature. This is going to cause a trend of starting a stand alone list for unacceptable contents to misuse Wikipedia as a webhost. Graywalls (talk) 23:03, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

There is a clear difference between a list of "condiments" or "items sold at Home Depot" and of albums. A discography of a record label that has existed for over 30 years, has major distribution deals, and has signed many notable artists is objectively not the same as a list of UPC items at the grocery store, nor is it the same as a minor indie label listing their releases. glman (talk) 17:11, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

@CNMall41: well none of the ke.p proponents have commented with or added refs. Graywalls (talk) 01:38, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the ping. I cannot find anything talking about the list as a group so left a vote. For the record, I do not advocate for keeping lists because of "userfulness." That is why we have categories, navigational boxes, etc. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete - Regardless of usefulness, lists must meet WP:NLIST where references need to detail the list as a group, not just the individual entries on the list. --CNMall41 (talk) 03:49, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 12:35, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete Generally for publishers that do not have significant roles in the creation of creative works outside of funding, distribution and promotion, a catalog of their works is overkill, unless there is decent sourcing that discuss the whole of the catalog in a significant fashion. Eg we would never list every book published by Penguin, but we may do it for a smaller publisher that gained a reputation for promoting offbeat works. It is more appropriate to lists artists represented by the label even if the artist didn't exclusively release through thst label. Masem (t) 18:02, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

From Me to You (Crunchy Black album)

AfDs for this article:

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per the first discussion, no evidence that this album is notable, and since the artist's page is just a redirect to the far more notable group he is a part of, this doesn't even serve a purpose as a redirect. No chart positions, no certifications, only one review that really goes in-depth about the album (the AllMusic writeup is more of an overview of the release, while the XXL piece is an interview so not independent), no evidence of notability to pass WP:NALBUMS. My attempt to have the page speedy deleted per WP:A9 (see the last discussion) was declined. JeffSpaceman (talk) 10:45, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Tennessee. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:49, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Delete - This is tougher than it looks because the album received a couple of pro reviews though they were pretty short. However, the rapper was declared non-notable outside of Three 6 Mafia in this recent AfD, so it's tough to justify an album article. The album's existence could be mentioned briefly at the Three 6 Mafia article, especially because Crunchy Black is still with them, at least intermittently. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:18, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 12:43, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

List of songs based on a film

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Same issues as with Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs that retell a work of literature, but that one at least has references - here we have nothing. Just OR trivia, with most songs here not even seemingly notable (not blue linked). Fails WP:NLIST and WP:V. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:57, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Albums and songs, Popular culture, and Lists. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:57, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Comment In some of these, I wonder if the directionality is backwards or indeterminate. Purple Rain is from the soundtrack to the film, so which came first? Jclemens (talk) 09:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Addressed; see page. As for Purple Rain (the song), it was written before but was obviously used in the film, and is therefore out of the present list. Feel free to create List of films based on songs, though. I'd be happy to help. A lot of very reliable sources exist on the topic. And I do mean a lot. The category exists. Feel free to add it to Purple Rain (the film). -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 22:29, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 10:51, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Delete - This article dates way back 2006, the dark ages of WP when it was fun to create lists of geek trivia. An article of this title may have some encyclopedic value if it had references to serious movie/music histories, but here we just have a bunch of original research and fixing it would be a TNT waste of volunteer resources. I second the previous commenter's point as well, because some songs here are soundtrack entries described incorrectly as being "about" the associated film. From personal knowledge I can also say that several songs here, especially those by metal bands, are actually inspired by books that were themselves adapted into films. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:30, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Can you have a look? I’ve added and removed a few things. Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:36, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I acknowledge the work that has been done on the article after the nomination and after my vote, but I am sticking with my reasoning. There are still many soundtrack songs incorrectly described as being "based on" the film. I also remain unconvinced that this isn't all original research because the various songs listed could be literally about a film, could be a tribute to a film (which is the case for many of the metal songs), could simply namedrop a film's title as a cultural reference, or could satirize a film (e.g. Weird Al's "Ode to a Superhero"). The entire premise of this list article simply falls apart because it can't stick with "based on". Also, I agree with a comment below about many of the found sources being opinion-based listcicles, though that is not true for all of them. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:41, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete - Even if this was a topic that passed the WP:GNG or WP:NLIST, the article is completely unsourced, comprised entirely of WP:OR, and, as pointed out already, is filled with flat out incorrect information. Rorshacma (talk) 15:55, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
i’ve started cleaning up and sourcing. Let me know if that looks better to you. It still can be much better. Only went trough the 1st half. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:38, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Keep: (and a STRONG keep). WP:NLIST indicates that lists can be kept if coverage about their subject as a set exists. It is obviously the case here. Even a cursory check can provide sources that prove that.... https://screencrush.com/songs-inspired-by-movies/ https://www.chicagotribune.com/2021/07/26/25-songs-inspired-by-movies/ https://collider.com/best-songs-inspired-by-movies/ etc, etc, ETC. Cleanup the page, add references, refine inclusion criteria, etc, sure but deletion, no. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 20:06, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Comment - The issue is that any type of list or article on this topic based on sources would essentially need to be created from scratch. The current list was created without the use of any sources, making it entirely WP:OR and is rife with errors and dubious entries. I very rarely ever reference this essay in AFDs, but in this case I agree with doomsdayer520 that this is a TNT situation - cleanup would essentially mean starting over. Rorshacma (talk) 20:46, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
Sure, maybe. But that is not a reason to delete the page, in my opinion. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:15, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
So how do you suggest we improve it? Ideally, someone would rewrite it now, but if nobody steps up, are we supposed to keep this mess? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
We don't keep mess, we keep pages. And Mushy Yank steps up and improves them. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:18, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
@PiotrusWhat do you think of its current state? It takes a lot of time, so not finished. I might finish later if I have time and courage. and I know it’s not yet ready for GA, don’t worry, :D. A table with dates (song/film)/album title would be nice. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:44, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
@Mushy Yank I am a bit busy ATM, feel free to treat my current vote as having changed delete to draftify. I am still concerned this is too much a trivia listicle, but it if it kept, it's ok-ish. It is a much better listicle than most others I've seen. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:30, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
I see no reason to Draftify this now, honestly, given the recent improvements by Wizmut. Every entry is sourced and the topic as a set is mentioned in sources cited. Mushy Yank (talk) 10:52, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Delete per WP:TNT and WP:OR. There might be a hypothetical notable article with a slightly different scope, but there would be no reliable statements to WP:PRESERVE. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:34, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Added/removed things; tell me if you think it’s better, please. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 21:41, 31 October 2024 (UTC)
Note: This article has significantly changed since its AfD nomination. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 11:43, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Keep per WP:HEY being in progress. I believe this topic fullfills WP:NLIST and the issues can be solved editorially. Thanks to the start in improving done by Mushy Yank there is now something to preserve and WP:TNT is no longer applicable. If concerns on erroneous information remain, unreferenced material can be removed. Ideally, the available secondary sources are used first to check out what can be referenced. But the sources available and already in place show that this is a feasible list with quite a number of possible entries. Daranios (talk) 16:12, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Keep as the article has been significantly improved since nomination including the addition of 13 references such as reliable newspapers, websites, and books with others being added so that WP:NLIST is passed and deletion is unnecessary in my view, Atlantic306 (talk) 23:29, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Delete Indiscriminate list with no obvious utility, especially since many of the songs were literally created FOR the film in question. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:17, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

@Zxcvbnm and Pokelego999: since many of the songs were literally created FOR the film in question If you read what's been written above you'll see that this is an error which is fixable and currently in the process of being fixed. So WP:BATHWATER would apply. Daranios (talk) 16:21, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Other issues are still standing, such as a lack of a discernible scope and a lack of coverage of this topic area. Even if one issue is being fixed, there are many more insurmountable problems that are unlikely to be resolved that hinder this article from being notable and a viable list. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 17:56, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

What problems? The article does not need to be notable, its subject must be considered so per consensus. But maybe that is what you mean. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:28, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

As for scope and coverage see page and below. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 19:16, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, that's what I meant. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Delete there is no significant coverage analyzing the topic of songs based on a film as a whole. It's an INDISCRIMINATE list otherwise with an unclear scope of what should be included (Especially per Zx, as many songs were made for the film and not based on them per se). I don't see much of a need for this list in any degree. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 14:41, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

Define indiscriminate. See page. See sources with list (a set). Thank you. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:26, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

https://faroutmagazine.co.uk/best-songs-inspired-by-movies-bowie-dylan-clash/ Read intro. Read intro of other articles. Coverage about the topic as a whole regarding respective subgenres metal/horror, or Dylan, etc exists. -My, oh my! (Mushy Yank) 18:32, 30 October 2024 (UTC)

My problem is that every source brought up is just a listicle. There's no significant analysis in these nor is there any without the listicles. It's the same thing as citing "Top Ten Supervillains That Use Lasers" and attempting to build an article around five to ten of those kinds of sources. It might provide some decent coverage for a specific list entry, but not for the subject as a whole, which is what's needed to establish subject notability. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:00, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep There's a probably a majority here that have good sources. And WP:NLIST says "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set", meaning that there could be other reasons. Well, if a topic is covered by a tabloid sources as a group but also individual cases are frequently mentioned by better sources, then that's good enough for me. Wizmut (talk) 22:49, 1 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Please note that the content doesn't fall under WP:ATD-E, which means it doesn't qualify for deletion "per TNT".
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 21:08, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

Comment. If kept, rename List of songs inspired by films. More (and more reliable) references say "inspired by" than "based on". Clarityfiend (talk) 23:39, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

That would be fine with me. Daranios (talk) 19:46, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Keep per User:Mushy Yank. There are sources for WP:NLIST, everything else can be solved by editing.--cyclopia ^speak! 22:56, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Now Autumn 2008

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

An IP address recently tried to redirect this, and was reverted. A notability tag is on the article. A WP:BEFORE search proved fruitless. An AfD discussion needs to be had. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 07:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Australia. I dream of horses (Hoofprints) (Neigh at me) 07:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)
No sources, Redirect to Now That's What I Call Music! discography#Australia sometimes the IP address is right DanTheMusicMan2 (talk) 10:36, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting, User:DanTheMusicMan2 can you provide a link to the target article you are suggesting? Thank you.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:22, 2 November 2024 (UTC)

Redirect to Now That's What I Call Music! discography#Australia, fails WP:NALBUM. मल्ल (talk) 03:27, 3 November 2024 (UTC)

Good Day (BoyNextDoor song)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Doesn't seem to meet WP:NSONG... b-side song, didn't chart, no significant coverage in independent sources (all the news coverage references seem to be just regurgitated press releases from the group's agency saying the song exists).

Some of the article's content could maybe be salvaged and put into a newly-created article about the song's parent maxi-single (along with information on the other 3 songs, maybe?) but as it stands it doesn't fit the criteria. RachelTensions (talk) 23:57, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. RachelTensions (talk) 23:57, 22 October 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Earth, Wind & Fire (song) § Japanese version per nom. Nothing came up for my search Mach61 17:13, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Japan and South Korea. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:54, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:32, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep: here's are the reasons!

Recent Release and Reception: "Good Day" is the first original Japanese-language song by BoyNextDoor, released on July 10, 2024, as part of their maxi single "And," which also includes Japanese re-recordings of previous hits. This context showcases its importance in the group's discography and the expanding international reach of K-pop.
Cultural Impact: The song, characterized as a hip-hop track, deals with themes of self-empowerment and enjoying solitude after a breakup. This relatable subject matter can resonate with a wide audience, enhancing its cultural relevance.
Industry Recognition: BoyNextDoor has already gained significant recognition in the K-pop industry, including awards such as the Global Rising Artist at the 2023 Melon Music Awards. This success indicates a strong fanbase and establishes their credibility as a notable act.
Source Citations: Provide citations from reputable K-pop news sites like Allkpop, Kpopping, and Kpoppie that cover the song's release and significance. These sources validate the content and add weight to the article's claims about the song's impact and the group's activities. ( https://www.allkpop.com/video/2024/08/boynextdoor-reveal-special-mv-for-good-day-b-side-track ), (https://kpopping.com/musicalbum/2024-AND2/GOOD-DAY10), (https://kpoppie.com/boynextdoor-members-profiles/)
OTHER LINKS:
https://www.allkpop.com
https://kpopping.com/musicalbum/2024-AND2/GOOD-DAY10
https://kpoppie.com

WikiNicExplorer 7:16, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Alright so: none of these reasons assert how the song meets WP:NSONG notability criteria.
Point #2 doesn't describe any actual cultural impact, point #3 is discussing the notability of the band, not the song. Nobody is questioning the notability of the band, and point #4 is moot as none of those sources are reliable sources, and, in fact, most of them are specifically noted as unreliable sources at WP:KO/RS#UR.
Thanks RachelTensions (talk) 20:44, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

I have no idea why WP:Convenient Discussions is attributing the above keep vote to me, tried to fix it but anyway.. if anyone is confused it was made by WikiNicExplorer, not me. RachelTensions (talk) 20:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:35, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

FYI it would appear that @WikiNicExplorer's above "keep" vote was generated by AI (asking ChatGPT to generate a response for why this article should not be deleted results in almost identical text). RachelTensions (talk) 06:36, 7 November 2024 (UTC)

Back to the Real

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Probably should have discussed this along with Reel Tight. Looking at the sources (that aren't dead), the only source that somewhat confirms WP:NRV is an article by OffBeat and even then, the article doesn't elaborate much other than calling the band a success story. TeapotsOfDoom (talk) 00:47, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
Weak Keep - Given the concurrent discussion for the group at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reel Tight, the album has some notablitily for low chart placement and a couple of middling hit singles, but more reliable sources for those achievements are needed. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:14, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 02:21, 22 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:58, 29 October 2024 (UTC)

Keep either this or Reel Tight, merging text and redirecting to one or the other. It made three charts; the dead links don't matter as they can be resolved, and in the case of Vibe, the citation is to the mag; and the nominator gave no indication that a BEFORE was performed, let alone if the BEFORE used databases and non-Google methods to look for sources about a group from the late '90s... Caro7200 (talk) 21:49, 29 October 2024 (UTC)
Comment - The band's article just barely survived delation at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Reel Tight, and I have fleshed out their article a bit with sources from this album article, though there is very little to work with. That may alter the trajectory of this album AfD, though I will leave my vote as-is to avoid confusion. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:47, 1 November 2024 (UTC)
Redirect to Reel Tight: now that the target survived AfD. Owen× ☎ 19:28, 5 November 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: This is likely the final relist - Can we reach a consensus between keeping this article or redirecting it to Reel Tight?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ThadeusOfNazereth(he/him)^{Talk to Me!} 13:45, 6 November 2024 (UTC)

Ireland Eurovision Song Contest entries discography

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The discography and chart history of a nation's Eurovision entries has no relevance to the country's participation in Eurovision. Beyond the songs being Eurovision entries (which are already covered in more detail at Ireland in the Eurovision Song Contest), how they charted in their country or elsewhere does not have an impact on the nation's participation history nor its success/placement at the contest. Grk1011 (talk) 14:44, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Additional nominated article for the same reasons:

The basis of this deletion discussion is based in the following policies/guidelines:

WP:GNG: The list lacks significant coverage in sources, with most supplied references being the chart positions themselves, with no added context. The article does not establish what grouping all of these songs and chart positions together is trying to prove, show, or discuss.
WP:NOTSTATS: The list of one specific statistic about these Eurovision songs only shows how they fared on one specific country's music charts (not even at the contest itself); it lacks context or explanation.
WP:LISTCRIT: The list is a synthesis of available information, compiled nowhere else in this level of detail other than on Wikipedia, for which the membership criteria remain somewhat unclear. The point of the article is just to identify a song's placing? To compare? Why only domestic charts? Why do other articles list the album they were on too? What text could be added to provide context without becoming WP:OR? How is this a "discography"?

Grk1011 (talk) 12:55, 15 October 2024 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Television, Lists, Europe, Ireland, and United Kingdom. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 17:04, 14 October 2024 (UTC)

Delete both per nomination. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 17:10, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Keep. The information contained is relevant to the UK charts more so than the Eurovision itself, which is highly notable. It is also a useful guide to how successful the songs were in the real world. The information is well sourced, so I see no reason to delete. The UK article has been in existence for 13 years and receives regular edits, so obviously has a lot of interest. The nominator hasn't given any policy reasons for deletion other than he/she doesn't like it, it seems.Tuzapicabit (talk) 19:05, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
Keep Ireland Eurovision Song Contest entries discography. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding the nominator's rationale but, as noted above, it doesn't appear to be based on a specific policy. Not one I'm familiar with at any rate. To my mind, the main applicable policy is WP:NLIST. Which would expect the list subject/members to be discussed as a group. And several sources, including those I found/added in my own BEFORE, appear to discuss the topic (performance of Irish Eurovision entries in the Irish singles chart) as a subject. And discuss the list members as a group. As expected by NLIST(?) Guliolopez (talk) 22:21, 14 October 2024 (UTC)
@Guliolopez:, @Tuzapicabit: I've now elaborated to identify some specific policies. Grk1011 (talk) 12:56, 15 October 2024 (UTC)
@Guliolopez: @Tuzapicabit: Are you able to provide updated feedback based on the policies now added? You asked for this, so I want to make sure you've seen it and had a chance to respond/refute. Thanks. Grk1011 (talk) 13:10, 31 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:32, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Delete both. Given the policies quoted here, particularly WP:NOTSTATS and WP:LISTCRIT, I believe there is a strong case to be made that these lists do not qualify for inclusion on Wikipedia. Sims2aholic8 (talk) 18:53, 24 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 18:22, 28 October 2024 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Final relisting.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:25, 4 November 2024 (UTC)

User:Sam S/central

Contents

GA nominations

Albums

Songs

Other music articles

Other music articles reassessments

Deletion candidates

Tha Carter albums

Alas Agnes

DSU Fight Song

Electric Nebraska

Trafalgar Street (album)

Music to Scream To

Static/Crash

2 Hands (song)

Tooth & Nail Records discography

From Me to You (Crunchy Black album)

List of songs based on a film

Now Autumn 2008

Good Day (BoyNextDoor song)

Back to the Real

Ireland Eurovision Song Contest entries discography