| Revision as of 06:55, 9 December 2024 editJclemens (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers45,434 edits →Stars in the Sky: k← Previous edit | Latest revision as of 03:41, 16 December 2024 edit undoExplicit (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators324,495 edits →Stars in the Sky: Closed as keep (XFDcloser) | ||
| (8 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| <div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed archived mw-archivedtalk" style="background-color: var(--background-color-progressive-subtle, #F3F9FF); color: var(--color-base, inherit); margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid var(--border-color-subtle, #AAAAAA);"> | |||
| :''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:var(--color-error, red);">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' | |||
| <!--Template:Afd top | |||
| Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of ]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. --> | |||
| The result was '''keep'''__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. ]] 03:41, 16 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| ===]=== | ===]=== | ||
| {{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|M}} | |||
| <div class="other-afds" style="width:33%; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: var(--background-color-interactive-subtle, #f8f9fa); color: var(--color-base, inherit); margin: 0.5em 0 0.5em 1em; padding: 0.2em; float: right; clear: right; font-size: 88%; min-width:20em; max-width: 100%">AfDs for this article: | <div class="other-afds" style="width:33%; border: 1px solid #a2a9b1; background-color: var(--background-color-interactive-subtle, #f8f9fa); color: var(--color-base, inherit); margin: 0.5em 0 0.5em 1em; padding: 0.2em; float: right; clear: right; font-size: 88%; min-width:20em; max-width: 100%">AfDs for this article: | ||
| {{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stars in the Sky}} | {{Special:Prefixindex/Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stars in the Sky}} | ||
| Line 11: | Line 17: | ||
| *<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ] lists for the following topics: ] and ]. ''']''' ] ] 04:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)</small> | *<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the ] lists for the following topics: ] and ]. ''']''' ] ] 04:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)</small> | ||
| *'''Keep''' If I can find something in about a song, it's notable. ] (]) 06:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | *'''Keep''' If I can find something in about a song, it's notable. ] (]) 06:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | ||
| *:... wait, that's already linked in the article? As are a couple of other clearly RS'es? Can you articulate how you believe the GNG is not met or withdraw this nomination, please? ] (]) 06:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''' I don't agree that just because it's briefly mentioned in ''Rolling Stone'' that it should be kept, but given that there's some level of coverage from ''Rolling Stone'' ''Stereogum'' ''NME'' ''Complex'' ''Pitchfork'' ''Line of Best Fit'' ''The Fader'' and ''HipHopDX'' it's hard to imagine a situation where this is not independently notable.<!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) </small> | |||
| *:I didn't say ''just'' Rolling Stone. But if it's been covered there, it will also have been covered elsewhere. One source can be sentinel notability, without establishing everything by itself. ] (]) 16:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *:That's fair logic! Sorry for the pedantry - at any rate, this is a keeper. ] (]) 08:43, 10 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| *'''Keep''', found as well. With the other sources presented above, this song passes GNG (and it's a good, catchy one, too!). I might just add information gathered from those sources into the article if I find the time to do so in the short-term. Otherwise, this firmly passes notability requirements, including ]. ~ ] ] 06:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC) | |||
| {{clear}} | |||
| :''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's ] or in a ]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div> | |||
Latest revision as of 03:41, 16 December 2024
- 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. ✗plicit 03:41, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
Stars in the Sky
AfDs for this article:New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- How to contribute
- Introduction to deletion process
- Guide to deletion (glossary)
- Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
- Stars in the Sky (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)
This standalone song from Sonic the Hedgehog 2 doesn't meet WP:MUSIC. All of the the sources are just promotional stuff. It would be better if it was redirected to either Sonic the Hedgehog 2 (soundtrack) or Kid Cudi discography. Toby2023 (talk) 03:03, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: The first nomination appears to have been about a now-defunct disability website in the United Kingdom, a completely different and unrelated subject to the subject of the current article (the song, and the associated movie, did not even exist yet at the time of the first nomination). (No opinion or further comment at this time.) WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Film. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:17, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep If I can find something in Rolling Stone about a song, it's notable. Jclemens (talk) 06:55, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- ... wait, that's already linked in the article? As are a couple of other clearly RS'es? Can you articulate how you believe the GNG is not met or withdraw this nomination, please? Jclemens (talk) 06:57, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep I don't agree that just because it's briefly mentioned in Rolling Stone that it should be kept, but given that there's some level of coverage from Rolling Stone Stereogum NME Complex Pitchfork Line of Best Fit The Fader and HipHopDX it's hard to imagine a situation where this is not independently notable.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Vrxces (talk • contribs)
- I didn't say just Rolling Stone. But if it's been covered there, it will also have been covered elsewhere. One source can be sentinel notability, without establishing everything by itself. Jclemens (talk) 16:44, 9 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's fair logic! Sorry for the pedantry - at any rate, this is a keeper. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 08:43, 10 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep, found this as well. With the other sources presented above, this song passes GNG (and it's a good, catchy one, too!). I might just add information gathered from those sources into the article if I find the time to do so in the short-term. Otherwise, this firmly passes notability requirements, including WP:NSONG. ~ Tails Wx 06:01, 12 December 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.