Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ghosts (Ladytron 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   Merge and/or Keep. There is a clear consensus that the content of these pages should be retained in some form. However, pages that have very little content and which are not likely to expand significantly should be merged (with a redirect from the current song page to the song's section on the new page) into the articles on the albums where they appear or some other appropriate page. Due to the mass nomination there was no separate consensus on which specific pages should be merged and this issue should therefor be further discussed for any pages where a merge may be appropriate. CBD 11:56, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Ghosts (Ladytron song)

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Because prefers to log out and continue with the same, I add to the nomination the next pages:
 * Withdrawn
 * Withdrawn
 * Withdrawn
 * Withdrawn
 * Withdrawn
 * Withdrawn
 * Withdrawn
 * Withdrawn
 * Withdrawn


 * Delete No charts, no awards, no major sources, no covers by another notable artist(s), fails WP:NSONGS and/or WP:GNG. I tried to redirect them, and creator of all (except Ghost), an user who apparently has a COI with Ladytron, simple reverted me without solve the problem. ۞   Tb hotch ™ &  (ↄ),  Problems with my English?  23:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  ۞   Tb hotch ™ &  (ↄ),  Problems with my English?  23:57, 26 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Comment 'Creator' did not revert you. The creator was .--v/r - TP 00:07, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * reworded. ۞   Tb hotch ™ &  (ↄ),  Problems with my English?  00:09, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. These band is of course famous (I'm seeing them in London next week, bought my tickets months ago!) and the songs, while not as famous as some of their others, are still worthy of an article. They're a pretty famous band. Not just chart successes get Wikipedia pages if the band itself is this well known.--Tris2000 (talk) 13:41, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * And the reason why you believe these songs pass WP:NSONGS is... Ladytron passes WP:NBAND, but very few of their songs are notables (e.g. Playgirl (Ladytron song) charted in the UK). Neither of these songs appear to be notable. Just because their author is notable does not mean that they are notables. ۞   Tb hotch ™ &  (ↄ),  Problems with my English?  18:50, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect or Merge to the albums from which they were originally appeared. There is no indication that these individual songs are indivdually notable.  Much of the content beyond the basic confirmation of being a Ladytron song is not referenced.  To the extent that there is referenced material, or that material can be referenced, a merge to the parent album article would be appropriate. -- Whpq (talk) 15:30, 27 May 2011 (UTC)
 * "Much of the content beyond the basic confirmation of being a Ladytron song is not referenced". The whole content is referenced: follow the link to Discogs site and you'll find the tracklisting, release date, formats, song lengths. These pages are about the singles from a pretty well known band (on last.fm they have over 700k listeners/over 22mil. plays) even if they don't have major hits. I admit some pages are not finished but what can you expect from articles created few days ago? Give them time to develop. I tried to upload some single covers but they were deleted. On a side note, I think the user Tbhotch has a problem with my edited pages. How would you feel is someone try to delete all your work without solid reasons? He was very insistent and made me angry. I don't think censorship is part of Wikipedia rules. Believe me, I don't earn any money from these pages edited by myself. There's no reason to delete these pages. Thanks. -- deepblue1 (talk) 19:34, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:NSONGS? ۞   Tb hotch ™ &  (ↄ),  Problems with my English?  01:50, 29 May 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Ghosts, He Took Her to a Movie, and Sugar as they meet the notability criteria (Ghosts and Sugar charted and He Took... was named single of the week by NME) assuming they can be expanded from their current stub status. All the others can be Merged/Deleted unless their notability can be shown. KickingEdgarAllenPoe (talk) 05:35, 28 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:14, 3 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Merge to the albums they come from, as not notable enough to have own article, but merging is better than deleting the lot. D oh5678  Talk  18:52, 3 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree fully with KickingEdgarAllenPoe.  This, btw, is why mass nominations should be avoided if possible.  Some should be kept, and some should be merged/redirected.  Until they are separated, my keep vote will have to stand for the lot.    Th e S te ve   07:49, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
 * I really do not understand why the "merge" comments. How useful is:

"White Elephant" is the first single from the album Gravity the Seducer by the electronic music band Ladytron.[1]


 * Track listing
 * 1) "White Elephant" – 4:15
 * References
 * Reference

to the album? This is WP:UNDUE. Most articles are based on: "Song is a single from the Album by band Ladytron. Then a tracklisting including the CD single release and its remixes (if it had)", and that's all.

Keeping unnotable crap that fails a policy and a guideline won't help in anything to this project. ۞  Tb hotch ™ &  (ↄ),  Problems with my English?  06:11, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * The difference between merge and delete is a fairly minor one (in this case), but the main reason to merge is that the article is NOT deleted but redirected, and so will never get recreated. This should actually *reduce* the stuff that gets sent to AFD.  If someone actually finds enough information and citations to break one of these songs from the album, great!  But normally there's enough room on the album page.  The redirect also aids search results.  If you want to know about that particular song, a search of the song title only will get you quickly to the album page.  Cheers,   Th e S te ve   10:28, 5 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Then the correct word is redirect. ۞   Tb hotch ™ &  (ↄ),  Problems with my English?  16:07, 6 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes. A merge is normally added because if there is any relevant info not in the main article, it should be added.  However, it is up to those editing the main article, so we voters don't even have to look at the article to be redirected (but we probably should).  For instance, some (but not all) of those Ladytron singles charted, and that info should be kept.    Th e S te ve   08:23, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

t  DGG ( talk ) 17:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * merge The current requirements for the notability of individual songs are much lower than any other aspect of Wikipedia, but fortunately that something meets the notabity  requirements is no reason to necessarily have an article if there is insufficient specific to say.   and the default should be, like for other creative works,  merging unless there is actual critical commentary. I see none in the articles. `    DGG ( talk ) 17:08, 13 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge to album as long as content is not deleted.--Milowent • talkblp-r 02:19, 14 June 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge There is plenty of room on the albums for the songs. AIR corn (talk) 05:55, 14 June 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.