Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cold Case Love


 * 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   keep. I'm sorry, but this a very clear-cut case. For one, this page is a good article, and there was not a single delete !vote in this discussion. Attempting to dispute the obvious result would be futile. (non-admin closure) Biblio  worm  18:08, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Cold Case Love

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Previous AfD of 20 Rihanna song articles was closed as keep with no prejudice against individual nominations.

"Background and production" is mostly based on interviews with Rihanna and songwriters/producers who worked on the Rated R album. (Note that NSONG's guidelines on coverage in third-party sources "excludes media reprints of press releases, or other publications where the artist, its record label, agent, or other self-interested parties advertise or speak about the work.") Only two of these statements are specifically about the song "Cold Case Love", while the rest are vague comments about the album and/or Chris Brown. The third paragraph of this section is merely a prose rendering of the song credits from the album liner notes.

"Composition and lyrical interpretation" and the first two paragraphs of "Reception and live performances" are based on album reviews of Rated R that only mention "Cold Case Love" in passing. NSONG states, "Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability. If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created."

Similarly, the final paragraph of "Reception and live performances" cites reviews of Rihanna's 2013 world tour that only mention the song in passing.

Therefore, editors have not demonstrated the notability of this song, and it should not have an individual article. –Chase (talk / contribs) 19:48, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. The song is part and a result of a major incident been covered between 2009-2014 and I would say roughly still goes covered in many publications. The article has enough material to stand on its own, regarding of the stupid policy where the album reviews should be excluded, a policy that I strongly think need re-wording and changing. Also WP:GNG, all in all the article is notable enough. — Tomíca (T2ME) 20:25, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Again with your misreading of the guideline. Nowhere does it say that album reviews are not allowed in song articles, rather it says that if a song's only coverage appears in album reviews, that the song is not notable. And that is actually how this song is a GNG violation as well, since only being mentioned in passing makes it fail the "significant coverage" aspect. –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:45, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Also, notability is not inherited. The song being about a notable event does not make the song itself notable. –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:51, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 21:01, 22 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. NorthAmerica1000 21:01, 22 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - Obviously. What is wrong with you? This article has so much info for a non-single. There is so much information given by Rihanna and Timberlake in interviews about how the song came to fruition. You can't get info about how the song came about and was conceived better than this: first hand inside info from the people who created it. This is another extreme flaw in the guideline. How else are we supposed to source info about a song's conception?? Huh? Tell me. I'd really like to know. Because no one else would be able to give that information because they wouldn't have been involved. I have a real issue with this "passing comment" thing. If one hundred critics each write one sentence, or in your opinion, one "passing comment", does that still make it not worthy of inclusion or not allowed, despite the fact that so much people commented on it? I could probably understand if only two or three critics thoughts were here and thus only two or three sentences or quotes, but we obviously have far more than that in this circumstance. It doesn't matter how detailed or how brief a comment is about a live performance, because we aren't here to wrote an essay on that one performance. We are here to say when the song was performed. Critics obviously picked up on the fact that this song was being performed on a tour four years and three albums after it was recorded/released, and was performed on a worldwide tour on nearly 100 tour dates. Again, this song was not released as a single, but it has garnered attention regardless. There is more info about the background of this song than some of the singles released from the same album. This articles attracts on average 600 views per month based on the last three months; see here. —  ₳aron  12:52, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * As has been explained to you repeatedly at other AfDs, the music notability talk page, and other places, it's not a matter of how much content you can write. If there are no individual articles written about the work nor any sources discussing it in great detail, it is not notable and articles about subjects that are not notable should not be on Wikipedia. If there is "so much information" from Rihanna and Justin Timberlake, how come the only information from either of them used here are two passing mentions of the song by Rihanna, talking about how it is her favorite song from the album and how it is about her relationship with Chris Brown? Furthermore, being performed on a world tour and critics writing about the song in the context of a tour review, where they are primarily discussing the tour and may in passing mention songs performed during it, does not demonstrate notability of the song; it demonstrates notability of the concert tour. I agree that there is certainly some attention the song has generated, but it has not generated individual attention nor been written about at length. There is usable content here, but it belongs in the article about the song's parent album, not in its own article. –Chase (talk / contribs) 15:51, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Contradictory statements and also statements which are wrong/I don't agree with. You can't talk about the tour without talking the songs performed... The attention is individual, I don't see how you can say otherwise. —  ₳aron  17:34, 23 November 2014 (UTC)
 * I can say otherwise because I have yet to see any sources writing articles specifically about the song "Cold Case Love" outside the context of an album or tour review. –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:10, 23 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep – I would say this passes NSONGS based on the inspiration of the song and the altercation case related to Chris Brown, which, though unfortunate (hate that man), gave the song the notability it needed for a standalone article. — Indian: BIO  [ ChitChat  ] 07:05, 24 November 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep, as per the other keep !voters. I think that IndianBio above me said it best. — Status  ( talk  ·  contribs ) 14:24, 24 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Just keep, won't kill ANYONE - Like other people said it. It has even much for a non-single. LOL. There are tons of single articles which have composed of only a paragraph. Go consider deleting them and engaging them with their album if you wanna do something for your concerns. Dkisnis (talk) 19:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment - I originally closed as Keep but Chasewc91 disagreed with my closure and since I was busy converting my entire talkpage to HTML5 I simply didn't have any time to reopen it hence Chase doing it under my full support, Cheers, – Davey 2010 •  (talk)  00:03, 30 November 2014 (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.