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 keep‎. Narrowly more people thought notability was met and the list of sources provided was present for two relists, both source analyses of it resulted in favouring keeping, neither of which were rebutted by those who favoured redirecting. -- Patar knight - ^chat/_{contributions} 04:04, 27 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Snooze (Agust D song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Do not believe this passes NSONG. Charting is almost certainly too little (Vietnam Hot 100 page doesn't even verify it's charting; this page does, but that the sourced page doesn't even go past the top 25 of the chart suggests non-notability of the peak position), and the rest of the sourcing is album reviews which all barely mention the song specifically and a database page. Redirect to D-Day (album). QuietHere (talk | contributions) 02:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and South Korea. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 02:31, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - the song has charted on several national charts (Japan Oricon, Billboard Japan, Billboard Vietnam Hot 100, United States Billboard Digital Song Sales) which is a criteria for WP:NSONG. In addition, there is likely enough coverage in existence to expand the article to be more than the stub it is right now. RachelTensions (talk) 02:43, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, well-sourced article, Top 20 in Japan, clearly meets WP:NSONG. 162 etc. (talk) 04:16, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to the album per NSONG: "Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability. If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created." The only other sources being unimpressive appearances in chart statistics is a very low bar and should be ignored. Tag the redirect as having possibilities. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 10:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - I think the WP:NSONG criteria is being met, as exemplified by RachelTensions. The article could also easily be expanded. - Ïvana (talk) 03:09, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • The discussion of charting in NSONG is about establishing if a song might be notable, not that it is; charting itself is not not a criterion for being notable. WP:NALBUMS too outlines that charting is only an indication that a recording may be notable, not that it is. At this time, the article is two sentences, supported by three reviews of the song's parent album, and its genre stated in the infobox just failed verification in its source. @RachelTensions and Ïvana: you both talk about expanding the article to meet the actual criterion of NSONG; I'd like to see your proposed additions. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 04:00, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    • Few people are likely to do the work when the article might be deleted after they're done, nor are they obligated to do so. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      • I didn't ask or suggest that anyone should do the work to expand the article now; you've read between the lines. I am asking for evidence that the article can be expanded to a satisfactory degree, as it doesn't appear obvious to me. Since this is supposed to be a discussion, and not a vote, I don't think my request is unreasonable. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 16:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Meets WP:NSONG. dxneo (talk) 15:41, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to D-Day (album) per nom and Fred Gandt. Charting in and of itself is not a criterion for passing WP:NSONGS. The other sources provided are in context of the album. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 21:55, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Relisting. Arguments are divided between Keep and Redirection.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 03:42, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect: to the album. Charting could be notable, but there isn't enough sourcing for an article on the song alone. Oaktree b (talk) 15:24, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to D-Day (album). Although this article cites reliable sources, their coverage of the song is trivial at best, so it does not meet the criteria for N:SONG. There also is not enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article about the subject.--DesiMoore (talk) 15:45, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Before we get too carried away saying there isn't significant coverage...
  Other sources significantly covering the song (outside of the context of just a review of the album) include:

• Its inclusion in Time Out's "Best 23 Songs of 2023" list [1]

And significant coverage in articles at:

• The Chosun Ilbo [2], [3]
• Rolling Stone Japan [4]
• NTV News [5]
• Entax News
• Danmee
• Pitchfork [6]
• News18 India [7]
• Crack [8]
• StereoGum [9]
• Korea JoongAng Daily [10]

...and that's not even going into all the Japanese-language sources that I'm not familiar enough with to verify. Many sources cover the song as it was the final song completed by Japanese composer Ryuichi Sakamoto prior to his death, and, like I said prior, there's more than enough significant coverage here to put together a perfectly acceptable non-stub article (especially when combined with information on the song in sources that cover it within the broader scope an album review), and its charting coverage.

CC: @DesiMoore @Oaktree b @Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars @Fred Gandt

RachelTensions (talk) 16:20, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• • And you didn't feel like mentioning this at all when asked directly about it earlier? I'm no longer involved in this lack of discussion. Fred Gandt · talk · contribs 17:51, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

    I’m sorry? I didn’t realize we were on a deadline here. If the discussion hasn’t been closed, I’ll present my research at my own leisure without being chastised for it. Thank you! RachelTensions (talk) 19:38, 5 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I recommend that Fred Gandt review WP:AGF, WP:DISENGAGE, and WP:CIVIL as evidenced by his behavior in this discussion. Other examples are available upon request. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 16:51, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Just gonna chime in, We Got This Covered is not considered a reliable source. LoTrWiki (talk) 18:49, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you, removed from the list. RachelTensions (talk) 21:23, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Can we get a source analysis of recent sources brought into the discussion?
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:49, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Analysis of sources from RachelTensions: First Chosen Ilbo is probably sigcov, second is not. Rolling Stone Japan is an interview (not independent). NTV is too short, not sigcov. Entax is an interview. Danmee has a little bit of coverage. Pitchfork is also extremely short. News18 is very short and tabloidy. Crack might be barely enough to count as sigcov, same for StereoGum. JoongAng Daily does not have sigcov of the song. All in all, it seems like a lot of the notability hinges on this being a collaboration with two very notable musicians, one of whom, Ryuichi Sakamoto, passed away soon after. Toadspike [Talk] 10:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Looking at the sources in the article, much of it is not sigcov, but I think the descriptions in Consequence and this listicle count for something.

  I think this is a case where the sheer volume of coverage, the decent chart performance in Japan, and the involvement of several notable musicians (including this being the last song by Ryuichi Sakamoto) push me over the line to keep this article. Toadspike [Talk] 10:56, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Analysis of the recent sources would be useful.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Vanamonde93 (talk) 23:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep - The latest relisting asked for analysis of recent source but I think that has already been done. Some of the sources found in this discussion may not be totally reliable and others discuss the album rather that the song, but the song itself has indeed been covered in some reliable sources mentioned above, especially Pitchfork, Rolling Stone Japan, Consequence, and Stereogum. In all cases the song received extra attention as a collaboration with the late Ryuichi Sakamoto. The article can instead be expanded. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 16:58, 21 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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.