Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/A Head Full of Dreams (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 no consensus. (non-admin closure) sst ✈(conjugate) 02:30, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

A Head Full of Dreams (song)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:NSONGS, no indicator of independent third party notability as well as usage of unreliable sources like setlist.fm — I B  [ Poke ] 09:10, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.   Musa Talk  ☻ 09:55, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions.   Musa Talk  ☻ 09:55, 30 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete - Per nomination reasons. There is no notability in the coverage of third party sources. — Calvin999  16:47, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep. If we come to a consensus that there is not enough coverage, we should redirect to the album article, not delete. The redirect serves a purpose. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 18:13, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * There's not enough coverage, hence the reason for deletion. That is established already. Redirect not needed. Article has only had 159 in the last 90 days. People search the album article, not the song. — Calvin999  21:29, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Sorry, but that is not correct. We don't delete redirects that serve a purpose. It is helpful to redirect songs to their respective albums. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:50, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
 * If no one is searching for that title then no, it doesn't serve a purpose at all. — Calvin999  11:06, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * WP:REDIRECT says, "If someone says they find a redirect useful, they probably do. You might not find it useful—this is not because the other person is being untruthful, but because you browse Wikipedia in different ways." The redirect serves a purpose. I am not sure why you feel such a strong need to suggest otherwise. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:48, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Obviously you think a redirect is probably useful, otherwise you wouldn't be saying it. — Calvin999  11:20, 1 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Question Are 11 inline citations not enough coverage?--DThomsen8 (talk) 00:12, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * No DThomsen8, they are just repetition of album review and chart info that can easily be contained inside the parent album article and the Coldplay discography article. — I B  [ Poke ] 09:23, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Not necessarily, but I believe there is enough information about this song's recording, composition, reception, live performances, and charting history to justify an article. There are many, many more sources that could be used to expand this article. I added just a few. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 16:50, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Well where is the notability then? Existence of source is one thing and them being present in the article is another. The key here is independent third party sources talking about the song, not passing mentions in album review. — I B  [ Poke</b> ] 20:36, 31 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per nomination reasons. There is no notability in the coverage of third party sources. See Question above.--DThomsen8

<div class="xfd_relist" style="border-top: 1px solid #AAA; border-bottom: 1px solid #AAA; padding: 0px 25px;"> Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep: This article should be kept. Deletion should be out of the question.  Merger can be considered, but since the song for which the article is written happens to be the theme song on the album, it has a certain degree of prominence justifying its article here.  Best to keep. Garagepunk66 (talk) 05:51, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, <small style="color:#999;white-space:nowrap;text-shadow:lightgrey 0.3em 0.3em 0.15em;">&mdash; <big style="color:#ffa439">Coffee //  have a cup  //  beans  // 02:27, 7 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. Charting in at least three countries that we know of; title track on an album that reached numerous #1 or #2 positions; definitely enough material for an article, as has already been demonstrated. It's difficult to Google search for this song alone since the track title is the same as the album title, but it's clear there is enough material and enough notability. Softlavender (talk) 11:32, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep as this seems convincing enough. SwisterTwister   talk  07:29, 13 February 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.