Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Another Round (Fat Joe 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.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 01:06, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Another Round (Fat Joe song)

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested PROD. Concern was: No indication of passing WP:NSONG Eeekster (talk) 03:14, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Neutral Redirect to Fat Joe discography for the time being. The song isn't notable at this time and the album hasn't been released just yet. When more sources about the song come about and/or the album is released, then perhaps the article can be re-created.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 05:51, 20 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 14:19, 20 October 2011 (UTC)


 * What is the matter with this article? As stated it is an official single from an album yet to be released. Just because the album isn't out doesn't make the single less noteworthy it has its own cover art too. As for sources what else do you need besides straight from the artist themselves --Smush123 (talk) 17:14, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Also if you look at the single from Rick Ross' unreleased album http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_Forgives,_I_Don't that has its own page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_the_Boss which further proves my point. --Smush123 (talk) 18:20, 20 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: The difference between this song and You the Boss is that Another Round hasn't charted yet, which is one of the bare minimum requirements for passing WP:NSONGS and even that doesn't guarantee notability. Odds are that this song will chart but right now it's just too soon to tell and we can't create an article based on the presumption that a single will become notable at some point in the future. WP:TOOSOON WP:CRYSTAL Tokyogirl79 (talk) 03:55, 21 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Fair point it will probably chart sometime next week usually the minimum time for songs to enter charts is 1 week. Besides that though, aren't all album singles generally notable? I can give a couple more sources that mention this will be a single from the next album if that will remove the proposed deletion? --Smush123 (talk) 14:22, 21 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Added another reference (MTV). What more do you want for this article to stay?--Smush123 (talk) 14:55, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * The only problem is that charting and all doesn't entirely give it notability. Not every single is automatically notable. (WP:NSONG) It's up to the administrator who closes this to decide whether or not it's notable enough to require an article at this time or not. I noticed that you primarily do Fat Joe related edits, so I have to really, really warn you about WP:OWN. I don't mean to sound rude but you're coming across as incredibly proprietary as far as this article goes, which is something to be careful for. There's nothing wrong with only editing one thing but you've just got to be careful that you don't get a little one-sided. I also recommend that you look up WP:NSONG to become aware as to what is required for a song to become notable. The big issue I have here is that so far there's not a huge amount of reason for this song to have an article to itself, especially when the album is released. It'll just be a little redundant, Tokyogirl79 (talk) 04:48, 23 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Every album I come across on here seems to have a separate page for the singles. I added another source to try and meet the guidelines which I am unable to understand why it doesn't according to yourself and Eeekster. Can you find an instance where an album's official single doesn't have its own page? So what happens when the time for deletion arrives? Does the article get reviewed by an admin who has final say whether it stays or goes? Who will be the admin for this? Could you please tell me also where the guidelines are for this as looking at (WP:NSONG) does not make it clear as far as I can tell this single is covered significantly in reliable sources. I hope it doesn't look like I think I own the article as that is certainly not the case I don't mind people editing it with more useful information as that is what I'd hope since I don't claim to know all. By the time this is reviewed for deletion I would think it would have charted in which case according to you will meet a requirement so what would be the point in deleting it now?--Smush123 (talk) 05:42, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
 * True, I guess it wouldn't hurt to give it at least another week to show the chart results and any potential notability, but you've got to understand that saying "these singles have articles" isn't really a good argument. Even so, it wouldn't be earth shattering to give this a little more time to prove notability. I'm not sure who the admin is that decides these, but if you make a good enough argument you can persuade them either way. You've argued your point well enough, so I'm changing my opinion to neutral over this. I'm not entirely convinced but it wouldn't hurt to give the song a little more time to chart or prove notability. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 07:06, 24 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Is there a reason why, when logged out I cannot see the additional MTV reference I added but when I log in I can see it? I thought it might be my browsers cache but clearing it made no difference. Does anyone else see the MTV reference?--Smush123 (talk) 17:29, 24 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Is it this one? ? If so, then yes. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 20:46, 24 October 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79
 * Yes that's the one, but can you see it logged out?--Smush123 (talk) 18:14, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Davewild (talk) 07:49, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wifione  Message 06:31, 3 November 2011 (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.