Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Kiss (Dara 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. (non-admin closure) Spirit of Eagle (talk) 05:53, 30 January 2016 (UTC)

Kiss (Dara song)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Majority of the article is unsourced, not notable and is seemingly full of useless information. Equil 빵 (talk) 14:13, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  14:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Korea-related deletion discussions.  sst  ✈  14:22, 22 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Weak Keep. The song's top 5 position of the official Korean Goan chart, the information about it being used in an advertisement and the song's music video would show that notability of the subject is fairly more than small. However, I have actually encountered charting songs that unfortunately lack in-depth information in sources, (ex: "All I Really Want" by Kim Lukas), so I don't want my statement to be too much of a definite keep statement for this article's nobility. But something other than a delete or redirect at least should do. edtiorEهեইдအီးËეεઈדוארई電子ಇអ៊ី전자ഇī 00:53, 23 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Delete . There are equally as many other songs with even higher charting power, however, there are no articles about them as charting high does not really matter at all. Charting high usually means that the song is catchy or pleasant to the ear, nothing more. Songs are also constantly being used in commercial, so being used in one does not make it any more notable than other songs that were not used, it merely means the song fits what they are trying to bring across. To be honest, do we really need a synopsis for a music video of only 5 mins. I am sure anyone will be able to watch the video and understand it, it just a music video, not some complicated film that needs prior knowledge to understand. It doesn't matter if there are articles similar to this, it does not make this any better to keep. Equil 빵 (talk) 02:30, 23 January 2016 (UTC)
 * You've already nominated the article for deletion, you don't get to double-dip. — ξ xplicit  02:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)


 * It Should Remain. How high or low the single charted has little to nothing do with the fact that it was given a page. If contributors were to go by that premise, honestly, every page based around a single should be up for deletion. The point is if the song is noteworthy enough to be given a page, which this single is. Synopsis's of music video's merely add substance, it is not a crucial addition to any article but it is not a problem either. There are indeed problems with this page, but it can be easily rectified and sorted out with proper references, more background information, and a better layout. The reasons put forth are rather picky in my opinion, and are not good enough for this page to be deleted. Kittykat407 02:58, 23 January 2016 (UTC)


 * Keep. A top-five single with some coverage, clearly notable. It could use some work, but deletion is not the answer. The only section that has no sources is the synopsis of the music video, which Wikipedia allows per the second paragraph of WP:PLOTSUM. — ξ xplicit  02:36, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
 * Keep - Though I am not able to find more significant sources, the single meets WP:NSONG; it has charted at #5 on a national chart.  Ya  sh  !   03:53, 30 January 2016 (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.