Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hold My Hand (Michael Jackson 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The result was   Speedy Keep-- The AfD has been withdrawn by the nominator, and thus qualifies for Speedy keep. Candidates for WP:SK are eligible for Non-admin closure. There is also clear WP:CONSENSUS to keep. Johnsemlak (talk) 19:01, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Hold My Hand (Michael Jackson song)

 * – ( View AfD View log ) •

Some editors believe this fails WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG and are edit warring by turning it into a redirect. Seems like AfD is the place to find a consensus on this. I'm not bothered, but would like to stop the to-ing and fro-ing. Mechanical digger (talk) 02:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * WITHDRAW NOM Consensus is quite clear here. I withdraw the nomination and will ask the remaining delete !voter to consider changing position so that this can be closed. Mechanical digger (talk) 13:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Strong keep why on earth would we delete a single from one of music's most notable and successful artists, especially the day after it's released!? Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  03:03, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. - Fails WP:NSONG and WP:GNG. 6 references is not significant coverage. - (CK)Lakeshade  -  talk2me  - 04:33, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a silly AfD. The single just came out. Give it time to accrue more references before resorting to this. -- T orsodo g Talk 05:04, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Very notable single. Elmao (talk) 06:09, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: even if there was a debate, its reasonable to have a separate article when you look at how all michael jackson information is organized.--Milowent • talkblp-r  07:02, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep There are numerous reliable sources to establish this topic's notability including MTV, Billboard, New York Daily News, NME, Reuters Los Angeles Times, Vibe Rolling Stone magazine, FOX News, Chicago Sun-Times, The Independent, MSN News, The Washington Post, and numerous others: Google news search and Bing news search. A Quest For Knowledge (talk) 13:01, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * KEEP - rational for deletion is poor. crystal ball policy doesn't prevent stuff that will be obvioulsy popular from being not allowed prior to notability. The fact that this is a Michael Jackson single and there are thousands of articles on it mean this is notable for the same reason that the Olympic 2012 games are. Please read the crystal ball policy before using it incorrectly to fuel a silly AFD.--Manboobies (talk) 15:28, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment You misread my nomination. The article was being edit-warred between an article and a redirect that claimed the article was non-notable per WP:NMUSIC and WP:GNG. The only forum to discuss the notability of an article is AfD, hence why I raised it here. I'd be grateful if you could re-configure your remarks. Mechanical digger (talk) 16:00, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


 * String delete See my reasons for why at Talk:Michael (album) Tb hotch Ta lk C. 16:40, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 16:46, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - I'm no fan at all, but this is MJ we're talking about, and MJ singles...actually released as singles and not just filler on an album...are inherently notable IMO. More than enough WP:RS's anyways, per AQFK. Tarc (talk) 17:06, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Clear delete - As per the arguments made on the relevant talk page, which I would re-quote here but there's no reason to. Sugar-Baby-Love (talk) 01:08, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - The Song charted, the war can end, It did not fail WP:SONGS any longer. There are quite a lot of reliable resources to support the article. Parabola1999 (talk) 12:54, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - I agree with Parabola1999. The song has charted on the Canadian Hot 100 and the R&B/Hip-Hop Songs charts, which means it passes WP:SONGS. EnDaLeCoMpLeX (contributions) • (let's chat) 13:32, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - I can understand why initially well-versed Wikipedia editors made this a redirect. But no more. The song is gaining great popularity and has already charted in Canada. So we need to keep and develop the page werldwayd (talk) 04:35, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep - I don't really see any good reason to remove it. Now it has 22 references and this number can only increase. Ciszek (talk) 15:44, 19 November 2010 (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.