Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Albums and songs

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Albums and songs. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Albums and songs|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Albums and songs. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

Purge page cache

watch

Related deletion sorting

Albums and songs

God's Counting on Me, God's Counting on You

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

No notability established. No in-depth coverage in the media, and no chart ranking. Binksternet (talk) 06:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Binksternet (talk) 06:22, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:28, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete — (moderate to strong) — simply not seeing notability, coverage, or impact. Article created by a single-purpose user. Interestingly, the (all-related) articles this user has edited/created all mention one “Damien Drake.” On the article in-question, we have this gem: The recording session was filmed live aboard the Sloop, while sailing up and down the Hudson River. The music video, directed by Damien Drake, can be viewed on YouTube: It is one of the few, if not the only, music videos sanctioned and planned with Seeger and filmed especially to accompany one of his songs. The single is available for download on iTunes, Amazon.com, and all digital retailers.

So. Yeah. At the absolute least we’re looking at a re-write of “Seegersloop1’s” work to fix the possible WP:COI and WP:SOAPBOX issues and the definite WP:NPOV, WP:VERIFY, and WP:COVERT issues. MWFwiki (talk) 06:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A few minutes ago I added a COI tag at User talk:Poptopics describing longterm promotion of Richard Barone. I think I will add Seegersloop1 to the list of SPAs. Binksternet (talk) 07:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Cool, definitely seconded MWFwiki (talk) 08:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Torn (Lisa Ajax song)

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

Only relevant for Melodifestivalen 2019, and hasn't received sufficient coverage otherwise. dummelaksen (talk • contribs) 21:02, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. dummelaksen (talk • contribs) 21:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:24, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Guitar (The Lion Sleeps Tonight)

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This article was created in 2005 and does not hold up to contemporary notability standards, failing WP:GNG. The article mostly cites primary sources, and the only secondary source is a review of the album. There are a few secondary RSes that mention the song (e.g. A.V. Club, but there is not enough for a standalone article. The content of the article can be merged into Apollo 18 (album). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:31, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Apollo 18 (album). Capsule reviews in Billboard [1] and The Age [2] but not long enough to justify a standalone article. Jfire (talk) 00:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

They'll Need a Crane

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This article was created in 2004 and does not hold up to contemporary notability standards, failing WP:GNG and WP:NSONG. The article is a very short stub that only cites recordings of the song. There are some RSes that has non-trivial coverage of the song (A.V. Club and Stereogum), but there is not enough for a standalone article. This should redirect to Lincoln (album). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:29, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:29, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Statue Got Me High

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This article was created in 2006 and does not hold up to contemporary notability standards, failing WP:GNG and WP:NSONG. The only RSes cited in this article are on chart positions; the other sources are primary or user-generated. Secondary sources only mention the song briefly (e.g. PopMatters). Article should redirect to Apollo 18 (album). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:26, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Snail Shell (song)

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This song does not pass WP:GNG or WP:NSONG. The article cites only one RS, which only mentions the song briefly; the other sources are primary or user-generated. I can only find RSes that mention the song briefly, mostly in recaps of concerts. Article should redirect to John Henry (album). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:22, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(She Was A) Hotel Detective

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This article was created in 2004 and does not hold up to contemporary notability standards, failing WP:GNG and WP:NSONG. The article mostly cites primary sources such as interviews and does not cite any reliable secondary sources. The article is only briefly covered in RSes (e.g. Pitchfork and this tongue-in-cheek mention by A.V. Club) and does not have enough coverage for an article. This should redirect to They Might Be Giants (album). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:19, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

S-E-X-X-Y

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This article was created in 2005 and does not hold up to contemporary notability standards, failing WP:GNG and WP:NSONG. The article is a very short stub that only cites two primary sources. RSes only mention the song briefly in recaps of concerts. This should redirect to Factory Showroom. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:14, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Put Your Hand Inside the Puppet Head

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. The article mostly cites primary sources such as interviews which do not establish notability. The secondary sources cited here only discuss the song briefly, and I cannot find any RSes that discuss the song in-depth. The article is sourced okay, but it does not pass WP:GNG, so it should be merged into They Might Be Giants (album). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:11, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Purple Toupee

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This article was created in 2006 and does not hold up to contemporary notability standards, failing WP:GNG and WP:NSONG. The article is mostly cited to primary sources including interviews. The article does cite reliable reviews, but these only briefly mention the song; there are other RSes (e.g. Pitchfork) that mention the song equally briefly. The content from these sources could be merged into Lincoln (album). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:07, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Man, It's So Loud in Here

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This article was created in 2006 and does not hold up to contemporary notability standards, failing WP:GNG. The article is a very short stub that only cites two primary sources. The song did chart, and there are a few RSes that discuss the song (e.g. the ABC); however, none of them have enough coverage for a standalone article. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 19:03, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I Palindrome I

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This article was created in 2005 and does not hold up to contemporary notability standards, failing WP:GNG and WP:NSONG. This article cites a few reliable sources, but they are mostly about the album and not the song itself; it also cites primary sources that do not establish notability. Although some RSes briefly mention the song (mostly in recaps of concerts), I cannot find any that discuss it in depth. This article should be merged into Apollo 18 (album). — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 18:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 18:57, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Experimental Film (song)

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

Relisting after a failed bundled nom of TMBG songs. This article was created in 2004 and does not hold up to contemporary notability standards, failing WP:GNG and WP:NSONG. This article is mostly cited to primary sources (including an interview), as well as a review of the album. I cannot find any reliable sources that discuss the song in depth. This article should be redirected to The Spine (album), and the adequately sourced content could be merged into that article. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 18:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Vigilant Cosmic Penguin 🐧 (talk | contribs) 18:52, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Vegas Blue (Brian Tarquin album)

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

The reliability of the sources in the article is questionable. I'm unable to locate additional sources about this album, likely doesn't meet WP:NALBUM. Frost 21:19, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 21:36, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sources, including reviews in Jazz Weekly and Roots Music Review, are included. Popcornfan (talk) 01:18, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I added sources from legitimate media including Jazz Weekly, Roots Music Report, All Music Guide. Let's make the page live. thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Popcornfan (talk • contribs) 21:59, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Lana (album)

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

I'm afraid a simple talk page discussion won't do any good here. This is just a deluxe like any other special edition. It even helped the standard album back to #1. Yes, it is fairly discussed in RS because that's what happens when you tease new music. This is no different from Scarlet 2 Claude which is also fairly discussed. Trim and merge will do here. dxneo (talk) 13:59, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and United States of America. dxneo (talk) 13:59, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep By all accounts this passes WP:GNG; the reissue has been reviewed by Vulture, Rolling Stone, Variety, Pitchfork, etc. Apart from reviews, we have this critical commentary from Variety about its long series of delays. Elias 🦗🐜 ^{[Chat, they chattin', they chat]} 14:34, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I am undecided because there is indeed a precedent at Scarlet 2 Claude for merging the two versions together, but Lana is also receiving coverage as an independent new release. If this tactic (already advanced by Doja Cat and SZA) becomes a trend -- releasing an album's worth of new songs and saying it's a reissue of a previous album -- it may require a higher discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums about what constitutes a truly "new" album. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:42, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Coming here from the discussion at WT:WikiProject Music#Reissues, I'm not sure whether or not Scarlet 2 Claude is truly a case of applicable precedent here. I don't see any draft or AFD discussion suggesting that it was ever a standalone article, and I don't see any talk page discussion about it, making me think that the reason the reissue does not have its own article is simply because no editor has taken the time to create one, rather than it not being notable. Leafy46 (talk) 20:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Scarlet 2 Claude was just a practical example. I've seen more of these and it's honestly confusing as to whether one deserves a standalone article or not. Most are trimmed and merged into their respective originals/standard editions. dxneo (talk) 22:02, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

In that case, Scarlet 2 Claude is a precedent for not splitting into two album articles or for not having two articles from the get-go, as is the case for SOS/Lana. Either way, SZA's previous album was two years ago and she just released 15 new songs totaling 46 minutes, so why not just say Lana is a new album of its own? I don't get it, but if this tactic becomes a trend it is still worth a higher discussion. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:10, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - This meets the WP:NALBUM criteria 1 and 2, and there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article. Medxvo (talk) 14:54, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: As mentioned above, the reissue album meets the criteria for a standalone article. The coverage and reviews should be enough. And the comparison is WP:OTHERSTUFFDOESNTEXIST. CatchMe (talk · contribs) 15:06, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: has received plenty of independent coverage, including two reviews from Pitchfork and Rolling Stone which I just added to the article. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 01:07, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Unlike Scarlet 2 Claude, Lana has enough material and notability on its own for a standalone article. Flabshoe1 (talk) 02:48, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: As mentioned above by several others, the reissue album meets the criteria for a standalone article. Also, if the news today that both "BMF" and "30 for 30" have been formally sent to impact different radio formats (Top 40 and Rhythmic Contemporary, respectively) as the third and fourth singles is accurate, SZA and her label are clearly promoting this body of work as its' own project. Trainsskyscrapers (talk · contribs) 4:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)

Break a Spell

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

Fails GNG and WP:NMG, recommend redirect to Mami_Kawada#2013–16:_Parablepsia Emm90 (talk) 03:56, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Anime and manga, and Japan. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:21, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete It doesn't make sense for this to exist, and it doesn't even have any references. 190.219.101.169 (talk) 05:46, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I've checked the jawiki version to see if the article can be saved by translation, but yeah, no luck. ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 06:44, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per nomination. ⋆｡˚꒰ঌ Clara A. Djalim ໒꒱˚｡⋆ 14:40, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Natrag Na Voz

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

Non-notable album. References are junk. Fails WP:SIGCOV. Repeatedly rejected at WP:AFC. scope_creep^Talk 00:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Sweden. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

these references contain proof NovaExplorer37 (talk) 00:18, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete BPM are not valid references, and do nothing to establish notability. And there is also now Draft:Natrag Na Voz, which has been declined twice. And User:NovaExplorer37 put a false Featured article on the article, which I deleted. David notMD (talk) 01:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
well i could only use article wizard now all of a sudden i can create wiki articles?????? NovaExplorer37 (talk) 01:56, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and User:NovaExplorer37 please read the policy on notability before writing another article. --Richard Yin (talk) 02:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
but these are the only sources!!!! NovaExplorer37 (talk) 04:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@NovaExplorer37: That is the point. If enough solid, reliable sources can't be found then the subject does not reach the standard of notability.--Gronk Oz (talk) 05:48, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
any way i can make the article better? NovaExplorer37 (talk) 06:13, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
if u google "Notable Albums by Zana" Natrag Na Voz is mentioned. NovaExplorer37 (talk) 06:16, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
so i added another source this time it mentions the album! and another one which mentions it about anniversary and a little type of biography that ok now or should i add more? NovaExplorer37 (talk) 06:23, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
forgot what sources i put on: One from a book and one which features Zana’s anniversary which also mentions the album (and on a book too)! NovaExplorer37 (talk) 06:25, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@NovaExplorer37 please read WP:Notability, especially the general notability guideline section of the policy. If there are no reliable secondary sources which provide significant coverage, i.e. cover the subject in detail, the subject shouldn't have an article and nothing you do will magically make the subject deserve an article. Mentions in books or Google searches aren't enough, the source needs to actually spend significant page space talking about the subject in detail. Did a major newspaper publish an article reviewing the album, for example, or talking about the production process? Or did an author of a book devote an entire chapter to talking about it? --Richard Yin (talk) 07:50, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Well in ex-Yugoslavs Books some did but rarely got published i See but this article is still a deserve to stay in wiki i declare. NovaExplorer2 (talk) 08:17, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Refs are being added during this AfD period, but the refs do not appear to meet WP:42 standards. David notMD (talk) 14:12, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
see now there two references that are alteast mentioned about the album

Best Regards- Noor NovaExplorer37 (talk) 20:51, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Both those references are non-RS. That means they are unreliable. IMDB is unreliable per WP:IMDB. The other one is a directory listing and is junk. Similar to discogs. You should not be writing articles. There is clearly a WP:CIR issue here. When this is all finished, I will be taking you to have a chat with an administrator. scope_creep^Talk 22:05, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

added a reliable source that’s from a book. 77.119.210.127 (talk) 17:48, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Its a passing mention, a single sentence not about the album. scope_creep^Talk 19:08, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

still i see it counts NovaExplorer37 (talk) 22:19, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@NovaExplorer37 I asked you 4 days ago to read the general notability guideline, but it doesn't seem like you've understood it. Mentions are not enough. If there is no reliable source that provides significant coverage, then the article should be deleted. Filling the article with references to short mentions isn't going to prove that it belongs on Wikipedia. --Richard Yin (talk) 22:40, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Richard Yin thought everybody is right with "Wikipedia is a site where you can create everything" doesnt seem like it ig? as you said that i need to read the "general notability guideline" to declare this i did read it (a bit) well what can i say i tried my best finding everything about the album Biographies, News Articles etc etc! those references aren’t reliable you say but some others use them for articles too ak. Discogs, Imdb, FM etc. there are also 2 wikipedia pages about this album, (and they have mostly the same exact information) and i mean every wikipedia is the same. NovaExplorer37 (talk) 00:06, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It was never that and its not case you can create anything you want. Wikipedia is not blog or a website. Every article must be verifiable per WP:V. Both of these wikipedia articles will be deleted and its non-notable. Lastly its not pages, its articles. scope_creep^Talk 07:49, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@NovaExplorer37: Wikipedia is described as "the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit", not "a site where you can create everything". This does not mean it is a free-for-all; those edits are still required to meet Wikipedia's standards.--Gronk Oz (talk) 08:46, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: per nom. KOLANO12 3 16:18, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jabuke i vino

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

Non-notable album. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 14:58, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Zana (band)#discography; the song itself does not seem to be notable.TheLongTone (talk) 15:32, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Serbia. Shellwood (talk) 15:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is about one song on a studio album, the article about the album is also subject of a AfD. David notMD (talk) 14:10, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dodirni mi kolena

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

Non-notable album. Fails WP:SIGCOV. scope_creep^Talk 14:57, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Serbia. Shellwood (talk) 15:42, 6 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, all the covers have to indicate at least some level of long-term significance, at least for the eponymous song. Did you check those sources that appear in a Google Books search for Zana "Dodirni mi kolena"? --Joy (talk) 09:52, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Joy: Per WP:THREE which is best practice, can you post them up there so I can have a look at them. Thanks. scope_creep^Talk 10:01, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't actually care that much to argue either way, I'm just asking if that was part of your WP:BEFORE routine. --Joy (talk) 10:11, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Looking at the Google Books references (to address the above discussion), only one book mentions the subject twice; the others all only mention it once. I don't see the subject passing WP:SIGCOV. --Richard Yin (talk) 03:05, 8 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The album and several singles were, and still are, highly popular in the former Yugoslavia. Under the legacy section, it is noted that songs from the album have been covered by other artists and achieved significant success with listeners. — Sadko (words are wind) 23:12, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The fact they popular doesnt' give them an automatic right to Wikipedia article. Is there coverage per WP:COVERAGE per WP:THREE. The gbook passing mentions are insufficient. This is place were discuss notability. A simple keep !vote doesn't cover any longer and hasn't since 2006. If you have evidence post it up. scope_creep^Talk 11:43, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Karnaval (song)

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

Karnaval is not in and of itself more notable than any of the 29 other FiK 63 losers. Its article consists of: some basic information about the release, identical to that of other FiK entries that were commercially released; a short review section, using only one source that reviews many non-notable songs; information about Festivali i Këngës, which could equally apply to any other FiK entry; credits and personnel, track listing and release history, which are not independently notable. This *could* count as a reasonably detailed article but not more so than that of many other entries that are not given articles because it's understood that they are not notable. It hasn't been ranked on a chart, it hasn't won an award (second place is not an award, otherwise I'd like to see an article for Evita which actually won FiK), it hasn't been independently released by several notable artists, etc. Maybe deserving of an article had it won FiK and progressed to Eurovision, but it didn't. Toffeenix (talk) 02:32, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Albania. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 08:06, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:11, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Elvana Gjata, because duh. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 03:30, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Floor's Too Far Away

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

Non-notable studio album; does not make the case for inclusion with listed sources; could be merged in band's page in part. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 04:16, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Why does it not make sense? DanielTheMusicMaster (talk) 16:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, typed a little fast there. What I meant to say was: Why does it not make the case? DanielTheMusicMaster (talk) 16:22, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The album has been mentioned in official publications. DanielTheMusicMaster (talk) 20:31, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not strong arguments to Keep or Delete.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:20, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Don't see a good reason to keep this. Album didnt hit any sort of charts or top hits, all the sources at a quick glance seem to just be either reviews on websites I don't know the reliability on, or just sites listing the tracks, with user-generated reviews.

Madeline1805 (talk) 23:30, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Become the Other

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

Studio album which does not make the case for notability. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 04:17, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:47, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How does it not make the case for notability? DanielTheMusicMaster (talk) 16:19, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@DanielTheMusicMaster Is this a vote? If so, please update your comment with a vote like Delete, Weak delete, Neutral, Weak keep, or Keep. If it is not, please add Comment or {{Comment}} which produces the following:

Comment:

Hope this makes sense! TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 03:25, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I think I understand now. DanielTheMusicMaster (talk) 17:42, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I think the album warrants an article, seeing as how it was included on the Official Charts. DanielTheMusicMaster (talk) 17:56, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Again, not strong arguments for Deleting or Keeping this article.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:22, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep, if the article did place high on some sort of chart, then I suppose there's a reason to keep it? But, I did get a whiff of WP:GARAGE. Not enough to warrant a delete vote, but still. Madeline1805 (talk) 23:27, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A City Dressed in Dynamite

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

Non-notable album; shows no indication of notability. TheTechie@enwiki (she/they | talk) 04:34, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Massachusetts. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 05:20, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:42, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dom har glömt

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

The article fails WP:NSONG with no chart information, and it fails WP:GNG with no significant descriptions of the song in the literature. The supplied citations are useless: four of the five are about other things, and the fifth is a Discogs.com link that merely proves the existence of the single. Discogs cannot be cited per WP:ALBUMAVOID, and it certainly does not establish notability. Binksternet (talk) 03:51, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Binksternet (talk) 03:51, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:01, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Elva kvinnor i ett hus as standard WP:ATD. No evidence of meeting WP:NSONG. Jfire (talk) 05:16, 10 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ANNO: X

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

None of the sources appear to be reliable. Doesn't meet WP:GNG / WP:NALBUM. Skyshiftertalk 22:54, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:50, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Rat's Brains & Microchips

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

Doesn't meet WP:NALBUM. Lacks reliable sources that give significant coverage. Skyshiftertalk 22:58, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:06, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:49, 9 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Araba 2004

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

Does not meet WP:NSINGLE. Unreferenced. -Samoht27 (talk) 05:00, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Music. -Samoht27 (talk) 05:00, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak keep: Appears to satisfy WP:GNG as the music video was a subject of scholarly analysis by multiple authors: [3] [4]. I can't find anything beyond these two authors though. The two authors both appear in the first source, but I don't think it stops the sources from being independent of each other. Helpful Raccoon (talk) 09:04, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Turkey-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:41, 28 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Mustafa Sandal or Mustafa Sandal discography: not convinced a separate article is necessary Rainydaywindows (talk) 07:06, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 05:37, 4 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 07:22, 11 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Album and song proposed deletions

for occasional archiving

Fahrer / Team für die Suche eingeben:

Fahrer / Team für die Suche eingeben:

Langbahn Team – Weltmeisterschaft

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Albums and songs

Albums and songs

God's Counting on Me, God's Counting on You

Torn (Lisa Ajax song)

The Guitar (The Lion Sleeps Tonight)

They'll Need a Crane

The Statue Got Me High

Snail Shell (song)

(She Was A) Hotel Detective

S-E-X-X-Y

Put Your Hand Inside the Puppet Head

Purple Toupee

Man, It's So Loud in Here

I Palindrome I

Experimental Film (song)

Vegas Blue (Brian Tarquin album)

Lana (album)

Break a Spell

Natrag Na Voz

Jabuke i vino

Dodirni mi kolena

Karnaval (song)

The Floor's Too Far Away

Become the Other

A City Dressed in Dynamite

Dom har glömt

ANNO: X

Rat's Brains & Microchips

Araba 2004

Album and song proposed deletions