Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of unreleased Rihanna songs


 * 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   delete. v/r - TP 02:47, 15 November 2011 (UTC)

List of unreleased Rihanna songs

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Contested PROD. This seems to be an unreferenced and trivial list. If there is a place for (any of) this information at all, and it would need to be referenced properly, then it belongs as a minor footnote to an existing article, not an article of its own. DanielRigal (talk) 23:23, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. DanielRigal (talk) 23:30, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Speedy keep, no valid deletion rationale presented, and the nom appears to be demanding cleanup or merger. We don't delete articles just because they are currently unreferenced.  Judging from List of unreleased Britney Spears songs, a featured list, unreleased songs by major recording artists are not only viable topics, but of course verifiable from the fact that even unreleased songs are registered with professional rights organizations such as ASCAP.  See also Articles for deletion/List of unreleased Madonna songs.  postdlf (talk) 14:11, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * If you want to disagree with my deletion rationale then fine but please do not deny that there is one. I see these articles as trivial (hence unencyclopaedic), indiscriminate and incomplete (hence useless) lists. I was not aware that we already had articles like the two you mention but WP:OTHERCRAPEXISTS seems to apply here. Besides both look deletable to me (although I am certainly not going to nominate them while this is pending). The AfD you mention looks like a bit of a farce, a point seemingly accepted by the person who put it out of its misery in their sardonic closing comment. My comment that certain unreleased tracks might be notable enough for mention as a footnote to a discography is certainly not a suggestion that a whole load of unreferenced trivia be merged anywhere. I have added the words "any of" to the nomination to make this clearer.
 * Our notability criteria are simple: Significant coverage in reliable sources. Do we have reliable sources discussing unreleased Rihanna songs in significant depth? A mere listing is enough for verifiability but not proof of notability. --DanielRigal (talk) 14:37, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * No, even giving your comments every benefit of the doubt (to which you have only now added notability concerns), you have a merger candidate for List of Rihanna songs, which is not an AFD concern. And let me know how your AFD of the FL List of unreleased Britney Spears songs goes (one of "these articles" you consider "trivial"?); I'd like to see that.  postdlf (talk) 14:55, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * "Trivial" obviously implies a notability concern. I'll admit I could have worded the nomination better but notability was the key point from the outset.
 * I have no immediate plans to put any of those articles up for deletion although I see them as unencyclopaedic fancruft. How many such articles are there? If there are more than a handful then I am thinking that it would be better to seek a policy clarification on them than to approach them individually. If nothing else it would avoid the fans thinking it was a pop at their favourite artists. I am truly incredulous that we have allowed any such articles in a serious encyclopaedia.--DanielRigal (talk) 15:13, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Category:Unreleased songs. Even speaking as someone who thinks Spears is utter garbage and a blight upon music, gender politics, and culture generally, I think we're usually better off focusing our "seriousness" on the way in which we cover subjects instead of on deciding what subjects are "serious".  One of the meanings of "encyclopedic" is "comprehensive", cultural history is serious, and 50,000,000 Elvis Fans Can't Be Wrong.  postdlf (talk) 15:33, 6 November 2011 (UTC)
 * I am certainly not arguing against coverage of pop culture to an appropriate degree. I am not suggesting for a moment that we should not have discography articles for major artists and this has absolutely nothing to do with what I think of the artists themselves. I just feel that covering unreleased songs is a step to far on the road to List of pop stars favourite breakfast cereals. The only time I could see it being encyclopaedic would be in a situation where an artist has a significant body of unreleased songs which is a major source of interest and gets coverage in reliable sources. "Lost" recording sessions held up by contractual disputes could make the cut in some cases and the level of interest in Michael Jackson's unreleased material is undeniable. I don't think that there is anything comparable here. All artists record stuff that they eventually decide doesn't work or isn't suitable for release. It isn't really for us to be asking what stuff they are chucking out. --DanielRigal (talk) 21:11, 6 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - I don't see anything in terms of coverage that would justify a list of unreleased songs for Rihanna. At this point, the article consists of an introduction that is a copy of the Rihanna article intro which is pointless with respect to this list article.  The list itself does not establish notability.  There are no sources.  A quick perusal that I conducted did not indicate that the topic of unreleased songs from Rihanna is in any way notable.  Note that I am not objecting to articles or lists of unreleased songs in general, simply that there isn't justification for one specifically with respect to Rihanna.  That may change in the future as her career progresses. -- Whpq (talk) 17:04, 9 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete referencing / sources are not optional. Stuartyeates (talk) 21:43, 12 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete per Stuart. WP:TNT. causa sui (talk) 19:04, 14 November 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.