| Revision as of 06:57, 9 December 2024 editJclemens (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers45,434 edits →Stars in the Sky: c← Previous edit | Revision as of 08:57, 9 December 2024 edit undoVrxces (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users6,247 edits keepNext edit → | ||
| Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
| *'''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) | *:... 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'' which is suggestive of independent notability. | |||
Revision as of 08:57, 9 December 2024
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 which is suggestive of independent notability.