Talk:Hate Everyone

Contested deletion
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it's been around for three years and no one's objected during this time. Put it through PROD, we'll see what happens, ok? --Mblumber (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because the criteria for A7 speedy deletion states "This criterion applies only to articles about web content and to articles about people, organizations, and individual animals themselves, not to articles about their books, albums, software, or other creative works." I have removed the tag. Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   15:03, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

My mistake, i'm not the smartest with the CSD and I Apologise for my mistake. Unfortunately it still has no sources and is liable for a PROD. Please don't mistake me as somebody who's going out of his way to take this article down, i'd do this with any article without allowed sources. I've gotta get off of WP but when i'm on later on i'll be putting a PROD Tag on. See if you can find a source before then. MIVP - Allow us to be of assistance to you. (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 15:12, 29 January 2013 (UTC)


 * I don't think he'll mind me mentioning that Dennis Brown, one of the most prolific and respected Wikipedia administrators in the past year, has admitted he's had a blind spot for CSDs, so I wouldn't worry about it. What would really save the article is a reliable source that gives a chart position. Ritchie333  (talk)  (cont)   15:39, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

The only source that this article has had was linked to a Twitter profile and correct me and revert the article's history if i'm wrong but aren't social websites automatically on the 'not allowed' list? And I don't want to sound mean but "It's been here for a while" is a bit of a bad CSD Contest is it not? Anyway instead of throwing a PROD out there straight away now that i'm away from restricted servers i'm gonna do my 'Source Search Analysis' (Explained on My User Page) and stick a PROD on it if necessary. MIVP - Allow us to be of assistance to you. (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 16:19, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Source Search: Negative Result
Search Results. A basic Google search on the article name/subject reveals no usable sources for this article. Sorry guys but all I can find on the first two pages when searching "Say Anything Hate Everyone" (just searching "Hate Everyone" in this case would bring up a lot of not relevant results about people who literally hate everyone.) are lyrics websites and streaming media websites (YouTube and metacafe), i'm afraid it shall have to face the PROD. MIVP - Allow us to be of assistance to you. (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 16:29, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Proposed merge
I have contested the PROD, because I would prefer the article to redirect to Say Anything discography instead of being outright deleted. It also stops some teenage vandal creating an attack page with the title, which is a bonus. I have added one Billboard review of the single, but that's not enough to pass notability. The discography page asserts the single hit number 31 on the Billboard Alternative Songs chart. This would mean it passes WP:NSONG (though this is under debate) and can stop the prod. Unfortunately, the link given is a dead link and I can't find a suitable version that backs it up - it seems somebody's reused the Billboard album chart source for singles and tagged what they happened to know / think / make up (delete as applicable) the chart position to be. Now, we can either assume the information is correct and was verified once, or we can say "pull the other one" and redirect. Any thoughts? Ritchie333 (talk)  (cont)   17:06, 29 January 2013 (UTC)

Merge: We all know aspiring Wikipedians hate it when their work is completely cut down, a redirect would overdo the lack of sourcing while keeping the work that was put into it. MIVP - Here to help. This way. (Maybe a bit of tea for thought?) 23:59, 1 February 2013 (UTC)