Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Love Club (song)

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 redirect to The Love Club EP. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 11:38, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The Love Club (song)

[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:NSONGS. This article is made up of largely album discussions/reviews without independent of the song itself. I was the one that brought this to GA status, but looking back, this article should not have existed in the first place. To comply with NSONGS, I recommend this article redirected to The Love Club EP. HĐ (talk) 11:08, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. HĐ (talk) 11:08, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Not only has the song charted, but it's got multiple Gold certifications. Realistically speaking, singles don't get certified gold and not have a few sources about them somewhere out there. Sergecross73 msg me 11:56, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The one and only criterion of NSONGS that matters is third-party, independent coverage on a song's significance, which this article lacks. I conducted another round of source review, but it appears that sources discussing this particular song are few and far between--most sources rather discuss The Love Club EP. In this digital age, it is getting easier for non-album songs certified, so I don't think it is a strong enough reason to keep a standalone article. I hate OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but a look at Taylor Swift singles discography#Other charted songs and we can see quite a lot of non-single certified songs not having standalone articles as well. HĐ (talk) 13:41, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Im very familiar with NSONGS, I'm just saying, in my experience, it's very rare to find singles that charted and certified in multiple separate countries and then not have a handful of reliable sources covering the song. Sergecross73 msg me 14:50, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

And I also said that, after a source review, most sources discuss the EP and not this particular song. HĐ (talk) 15:24, 19 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I haven't looked into the sources for this yet but as I was looking and I do have a questions for the nominator? It appears that this article is part of a Pure Heroine series which has every song from the album not only created with their own article but that all of them have been promoted as Good Articles. What is interesting is the person who appears to have done all that work to get it to that standard, is now nominating the article they created and even got a award for? NZFC^(talk)^(cont) 11:11, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notability requirements for songs were not as strict as today's version. If I remember correctly, a song that has charted on any chart could easily have an article. After lengthy debates, notability requirement for songs now requires third-party coverage, which is the one and only criterion that matters. Judging from that perspective, as this song's article's content is derived mostly from album reviews and not discussions on the song itself, it has no longer satisfied the notability requirements. I hope things clear up @NZFC: HĐ (talk) 11:38, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @HĐ:, that does. It had thrown me for a loop when I was looking through it all and was writing up a comment only to realise you were both creator and nominee. NZFC^(talk)^(cont) 11:46, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Northern Escapee (talk) 07:26, 27 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - nice joke though versacespace 04:40, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@VersaceSpace: I am sorry? HĐ (talk) 06:47, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Articles don't need to exclusively be about a topic to meet gng. The song is clearly notable and it charted. versacespace 13:03, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

That's for general notability. For songs specifically, WP:NSONGS states that songs should be covered in independent and non-trivial sources. Hardly any source discusses this song in-depth that it is "clearly notable". HĐ (talk) 13:50, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - The song has charted in several territories, and has received certifications. So passes WP:NSONGS. Ashley yoursmile! 13:09, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Love Club EP. Chart positions and certifications alone do not establish enough notability for a separate article. The emphasis should be placed on whether or not the song has received significant coverage from third-party, reliable sources (outside of EP reviews). I think that this is viable search term (and thus, should be kept to help readers), but I find that the sources focus on the EP not this particular song. Aoba47 (talk) 20:52, 28 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@NZFC: Given your comment above, would you mind weighing in your opinion on whether to delete/keep/redirect/merge this article? HĐ (talk) 14:32, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HĐ: thanks for the ping, forgot to come back to this.

Redirect to The Love Club EP. I was first thinking that notability isn't temporary so this article would be staying, but I see under that guideline "While notability itself is not temporary, from time to time a reassessment of the evidence of notability or suitability of existing articles may be requested". Then with HĐ's comment above, that when this article was created and even got to be a Good Article, the guidelines were ''not as strict as today's." I then assessed the article off the new guidelines. From those and the sources provided, my feeling is the song itself hasn't received significance coverage to warrant a stand-alone article and should be redirected to The Love Club EP instead. NZFC^(talk)^(cont) 22:48, 29 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to The Love Club EP reviews from parent album/EP own their own aren't enough to warrant a page. Neither are the very brief mentions HuffPost, Idolator, Billboard, and 3News or the artist commentary at The Cut (which is self-promotion and only a paragraph long anyway). This lack of adequate coverage within any credible sources not affiliated with artist/label/producers/songwriters renders any chartings moot, and contrary to what many seem to think, entering a chart doesn't automatically mean songs warrant a page. What WP:NSONGS actually says about entering charts is this indicates only that a song may be notable, not that it is notable. Those ideas aren't synonymous and I wish people would stop conflating the two. SNUGGUMS (talk / edits) 02:22, 31 January 2021 (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.