Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christmas Tree (Lady GaGa 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 Lady GaGa.  MBisanz  talk 02:14, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Christmas Tree (Lady GaGa song)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Download-only single, utterly fails WP:SONGS. No reliable sources found. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:12, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep or merge, merge strongly preferred. Extremely strong do-not-delete edit history.  While song is totally not notable it is by a Grammy-nominated artist whose album hit the top-10 in charts in several countries.  In my book, this qualifies under the "all works by this very notable artist s get a free pass" WP:IAR exception.  WP:SONGS recommends redirects for non-notable songs, so I'm kind of surprised this went to AFD instead of a WP:MERGE proposal or even a WP:BOLD redirect and merge.  I do not think a merge would be controversial at this time.  It would be a shame to lose the edit history and have some editor later spend time rewriting the article should this song ever become notable in its own right. davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  18:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I disagree with "all works by this very notable artists [sic] get[ting] a free pass". Nothing should get a "free pass" on Wikipedia. The reason I didn't ask for a merge/redirect is because a.) almost every time I merge/redirect a pop song it gets undone 2 seconds later, and b.) I think the (Lady GaGa song) part makes for an unlikely redirect term. Also, saying "should this song ever become notable" is looking into a crystal ball. What if it doesn't? Then we'd have to go through this again. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 19:30, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * If a marginal song by The Beatles got exactly as much press as this has - i.e. virtually no independent press - I and many others would say it qualifies under a free pass. Maybe you wouldn't, but I would be shocked if and afd for such an article wasn't immediately WP:SNOWed.  This artist isn't as famous as the Beatles, and if she were "merely notable" I would vote delete as well.  She's in that band between "merely notable" and "out and out famous."  davidwr/  (talk)/(contribs)/(e-mail)  20:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately, the "free pass" idea stems from a common misreading of WP:MUSIC, which says that "if the musician or ensemble that recorded an album is considered notable, then officially released albums may have sufficient notability to have individual articles" (emphasis mine). Unfortunately, many misread this and think it says that albums are automatically notable.


 * WP:MUSIC goes on to say "Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for a prominent album or for the artist who wrote or prominently performed the song." That would include the "marginal song by The Beatles" (although, frankly, I highly doubt that any song by The Beatles would have no independent press, as there would be at least 25 professional reviewers writing articles along the lines of "I can't believe no one has written about this song!")-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  15:56, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 19:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete - Digital releases are the latest big thing, but the song only reached 125 on the charts. No indication that it is notable at the moment.  Recreate if it is a big hit at some later date.  Burzmali (talk) 19:45, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - I raised my concerns about this song on Ten pound hammers talk page. — Realist  2  20:11, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

David and TenPound both make good arguments, in my opinion. As this is a single released on the internet, I think it is appropriate to delete it. The relevant information can be included in the artist's article and if/ when the song is included on an album, added that way. Delete ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:01, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as it isn't a notable song. It should probably be merged to the Album but that's not for AfD. Tavix (talk) 21:08, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete. Unlikely search term, so redirect is inappropriate, and I scoff at the notion that Lady Gaga is sufficiently famous to warrant any kind of exception. The only reason I have ever heard of her is the constant need to delete and redirect articles about her non-notable singles.&mdash;Kww(talk) 21:44, 19 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Merge to Lady GaGa, with delete being my second choice. The guideline does say merge, but there's not much sourced info to merge.-- Fabrictramp |  talk to me  15:59, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete as a non-plausible search term, fails notability per WP:MUSIC.   Esradekan Gibb    "Talk" 20:44, 20 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete for reasons given, but also for the dreadful writing, namely, "Christmas Tree is a song by Lady GaGa. The song exclusively premiered on Perez Hilton on December 2, 2008. The song features Space Cowboy. The song is available.....".


 * Note I have restored the AfD notice on the article. It was only missing for ~ 5 hours after User talk:Demi1993 removed it. Shouldn't impact AfD.  StarM  05:48, 22 December 2008 (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.