Talk:Grapefruit—Juicy Fruit

Notability
I'm not finding any evidence from Billboard that it charted or that has received significant awards or honors. Per convention it should be redirected to the album article unless it can be brought up to WP:NSONGS standards.--RadioFan (talk) 03:24, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * It reached number 23 on Adult Contemporary in 1973. 24.18.249.26 (talk) 00:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Reference?--RadioFan (talk) 00:14, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Redirect
This article survived AFD due to no concensus being reached but I do agree that it is a plausible search term. It redirected to the album article because notability has not been established. No verifiable references have been found to back up claims of reaching a position on the Billboard charts. The song has not been covered by notable artists and its received no awards that we know of. It doesn't meet WP:NSONGS and should remain redirected to the album article until it can be made to meet notability guidelines.--RadioFan (talk) 14:28, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * While the charting sources are considered "unverifiable", they are sources nonetheless. If you did go to the Billboard Database (which you did, and claimed you couldn't find it), you would've noticed that that particular source requires a membership to see the full database.  The webmasters of the websites that are claimed "unreliable" have never been contacted to see where the information came from.  Until we can fully establish true or false, and/or until we can come to a non-concensus conclusion, the article should not be converted.  It's a fact that the article provides sources to having charted.  It's an opinion that it's "not notable" or "unreliable".  The sources were cited, there was a vote (the article survived).  That's that.  I appreciate your patience with me, but reverting an article without winning a vote is unfair.  If this is okay, why vote in the first place?  I hope I don't have to do a Template:Uw-3rr.  Thank you.  Geeky Randy (talk) 20:32, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * These sources are not reliable, they are fansites. While you are correct that a membership is required by Billboard to view details of a particular week's chart, their database of songs is freely searchable including peak chart position information, of which there is none for this song.--RadioFan (talk) 20:42, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * I've sourced it now. I'm not sure why you were not able to find it. Paul Erik  (talk) (contribs) 21:46, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks, thats exactly the kind of reliable source that was needed here. Not sure why Billboard's website wasn't showing this, its usually far more reliable. Notability tags have been removed.--RadioFan (talk) 23:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)