Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Je ne sais quoi (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   keep. Enough of a rough consensus exists towards keeping (with the rationale that the song satisfies the subsequent notability criteria). Regards,   A rbitrarily 0    ( talk ) 19:05, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Je ne sais quoi (song)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

There are numerous articles like this referencing the Eurovision song contest, so here goes a test case. This song hasn't charted, hasn't been covered by multiple artists, and hasn't won any awards, making it fail WP:NSONGS. I don't think that solely being entered in the Eurovision Song Contest makes a song sufficiently notable to justify a standalone article. &mdash;Kww(talk) 14:38, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep - If we cound winning the Icelandic selection as an award (which could reasonably be, and also has an article on itself), the song would be meeting weakly WP:NSONGS perhaps. -- Cycl o pia talk  14:53, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Hadn't thought of it that way, but that seems to be a pretty low standard: winning the contest to be allowed to enter a contest doesn't seem particularly different from winning any preliminary in any competition.&mdash;Kww(talk) 15:05, 8 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Weak keep This, I think, is something of a special case. The bottom line is we can't adequately assess notability until the actual event happens in a couple of months.  Probably the ideal situation here would be to have one big article covering all the entries, with the option to split out the winner and the others that become hits into individual articles.  As it is now, notability in the immediate future is likely but uncertain, and verifiability/sourcing is no problem. Andrew Lenahan -  St ar bli nd  15:06, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:NSONGS and keeping it as a possibly notable song later is getting into WP:CRYSTAL territory Not sure I'd call it being Iceland's entry an award, especially without knowing how many entries there were. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:15, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete, not notable enough for it's own article, will never be more then the really short stub it is now Alan  -  talk  17:17, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * How so? Most articles of this type become much larger. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 16:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Delete As above. It is the same user creating these pages.-- iBentalk/contribs 19:55, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment I would expect that any winning entry would garner some pretty significant coverage in the relevant nations press. I'm not about to try and search online editions of Icelandic newspapers, but if this was the case then the article would pass the general notability guideline, which trumps WP:MUSIC. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 00:41, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * That's far from a universal mindset. Personally, I think music oriented articles have to pass WP:N and WP:MUSIC. I'm far from alone, there. Most of the music guidelines operate as exclusion guidelines in common practice.&mdash;Kww(talk) 00:49, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not convinced by that really. If a subject passes the general notability guideline then it follows that that subject is notable, and therefore worthy of inclusion. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 01:18, 9 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep. As is what happens each year, the song pages for each country are created and if given time and when an interested editor comes along, can turn into well developed articles chronicling the song's background and performance. Take Secret Combination (song) for example, there is no reason why any Eurovision song article could not get close to being similar to it. It may be a little crystal, but the song will be presented at an international song contest and will certainly gain loads of media attention as the contest approaches. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 01:53, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree with Grk1011/Stephen. The article needs time to develop after just been selected to compete in the contest, and the media attention received at the contest in May will help in its development. Sims2aholic8 (Michael) (talk) 16:47, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:NSONGS. The Eurovision Song Contest is unique in that its ‘preliminaries’ tend to be major song contests in their own right. – EdvardMunch (talk) 05:13, 10 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep One of the goals of WikiProject Eurovision is "Creating a page for each contestant and song involved in the contest." Deleting this page would impede the project's goal and would undo the effort of those that contributed to it. --DannyBoy20802 (talk) 00:56, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * If your goals run counter to notability requirements, then the goal takes second place. Saying to keep strictly because it is your goal is little more than WP:ILIKEIT. Niteshift36 (talk) 17:35, 11 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment It is worth noting the concentration of Eurovision Project members among the keep votes when evaluating consensus. DannyBoy20802, Sim2aholic8, and Grk1011 are all members.&mdash;Kww(talk) 18:22, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * And how our experience in working with them gives us a better idea on the abundance of information that is around for them to develop into great articles. Grk1011/Stephen (talk) 18:27, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't see that a "concentration of Eurovision Project members" is something to be worried about. Such members are editors of wikipedia, and we're here to find consensus among editors. I'm not part of the Eurovision Project, but I think you're out of line there. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 18:42, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
 * People are reading me as having said something that I did not. I didn't ask for their opinions to be discarded, I just think it is a legitimate thing to keep in mind while evaluating community consensus. Any time a subset of the community is heavily weighted in a discussion, that weighting needs to be considered.&mdash;Kww(talk) 20:30, 14 February 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.