Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Naughty List

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. Courcelles (talk) 17:50, 24 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Naughty List[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NMUSIC. Only one independent non-database source, the Rolling Stone article; and even that one is borderline trivial. DavidLeeLambert (talk) 15:25, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. DavidLeeLambert (talk) 15:29, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 15:38, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Reached the top 50 in Ireland and the UK, appeared on two other secondary charts, and is a song that occasionally reappears on the lower end of the UK charts around Christmas. The presence of one news source doesn't mean there isn't more coverage out there. Ss112 16:15, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Found a long list of announcement articles ([1][2][3][4][5]) and a full review of the song, and all from a brief Google search. This plus the charting is plenty enough. QuietHere (talk) 16:31, 17 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to push back on the "borderline trivial" assessment of the Rolling Stone article. That article is standard length for a single announcement/release and describes a good bit of detail about the song. I've seen much worse from this type of article, including while searching for coverage of this very song. QuietHere (talk) 09:14, 18 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. I am primarily convinced by the coverage provided by QuietHere. That provides enough evidence in my opinion that there is significant coverage from reliable, third-party sources for this song to be considered notable enough for its own article. Aoba47 (talk) 01:44, 19 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. There is WP:SIGCOV by numerous WP:RS establishing WP:NOTABILITY. Ultimately the subject meets WP:NMUSIC. Shawn Teller (talk) 12:38, 24 March 2023 (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.