Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Next Episode (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 delete. Tone 17:22, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Next Episode (song)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Was deprodded with the following rationale: "Single has been covered by various sites, including official sites and off-topic sites, giving notable sourcing. However, I will add other sources within the next few days." However, no improvements have been made. The commonality of the name of the song makes researching difficult, adding KM-MARKIT to the search narrows the results, but doesn't give the type of in-depth coverage from independent reliable sources to show this song passes WP:GNG, and it certainly doesn't pass WP:NSONG.  Onel 5969  TT me 18:50, 1 January 2017 (UTC)

I haven't had access to the Internet for a while, but I can give appropriate sourcing before the middle of the month. Please give me time to get the data, which I've seen in the past. Xenobia4 (talk) 05:54, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 18:20, 5 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 06:05, 7 January 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:43, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete. Was going to give Xenobia4 the benefit of the doubt and argue for moving into Draft space (incubate), with an AfC submission once more sources have been added. However, after researching (albeit briefly) the topic, it does not seem that this song meets WP:NSONG or WP:GNG, nor does it seem like it has the potential to meet WP:N at this time. Although I invite Xenobia4 to provide sources (either here at AfD, at the Talk page, or better yet, in the article itself as sources) to support notability. --  talk2Chun  (talk) (contributions) 14:10, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom and Talk2chun's rationale. Does not meet notability guidelines. Don't really believe that page creator will be able to turn up info nobody else can find. FuriouslySerene (talk) 08:40, 15 January 2017 (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.