Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Adventures of Rain Dance Maggie


 * 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. Courcelles 22:32, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

The Adventures of Rain Dance Maggie

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Non notable song article. Does not fufill WP:NMUSIC. After disscussion amongst editors, it was agreed that the article should be turned into a redirect until more information (or chart positions) were available for it. This has been opposed by IP's. This is the problem.  I Help, When I Can. [12] 03:26, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect and protect Per this and this. Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it!  See terms and conditions.  03:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. The song is notable, as it's the first single off of their highly-anticipated tenth studio album. I've read WP:NMUSIC, and I believe that the song meets all the of the criteria. It has already been released, the single cover has been made available, and the music video is completed and set to air. Deleting the article now would be pointless, and redirecting it to the album will only confuse readers who want information regarding the song. Also, deleting or redirecting the article isn't a way to solve a problem on Wikipedia. It's avoiding it if anything. WereWolf (talk) 03:36, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Why are we debating deleting an entry that will be recreated in a couple of days? What is the point? Francium12  04:21, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: Requirements of WP:NMUSIC:
 * "All articles on albums, singles or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines, with significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." → The article barely has any sources.
 * "Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song. Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable. Notability aside, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." → #1, That's why we redirect. #2, The song has not charted. #3, There isn't enough information right now for the article to be anything other than a stub.
 * Also to respond to WereWolf's argument, the existence of something (in this case let's say a Red Hot Chilli Peppers single) does not make it notable.
 * To respond to Francium12's argument, please read WP:CRYSTAL.  I Help, When I Can. [12] 04:32, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah but we all know it is going to chart short of Western civilization being wiped out. I'd invite the Wikipedia community to exercise a little discretion :-)  Francium12  05:02, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  — I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 08:53, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

109.65.7.100 (talk) 10:34, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Common sense dictates that this will do well enough to justify it's continued existence on Wikipedia, most likely before this AFD is complete. The fact anything since One Hot Minute has charted mystifies me, but that's not what WP is for, is it... mores the pity!  Benny Digital  Speak Your Brains 10:24, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep Why should this article be deleted? This is article is notable enough to keep because it's the first single from the upcoming Red Hot Chili Peppers album. 76.191.133.247 (talk) 15:19, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep: Obviously met the chart provision of music notability. Andrewlp1991 23:55, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Obvious Keep. Is this serious? I just searched this on danotable... The song is mentioned on some many different news articles it would be listed here just off the recent events surrounding its leak.... I doubt notability is a real issue.
 * Keep: The single is already released and we have enough references. Whoever's idea was it to delete needs to get fired :) Maplejet (talk) 13:47, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree, Keep. Austin Snake Boy (talk) 14:57, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree too, Keep. --HC 5555 (talk) 08:20, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. Don't hate.----dannycas (talk) 09:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to I'm with You (album). All I see in terms of arguments for keeping it are that it will be notable in the future.  Well, in that case, the redirect can be undone when that happens. -- Whpq (talk) 14:47, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I agree as well, Keep. Alex (talk) 16:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Easy Keep, first single off a new album, and already charting. Killswitch Engage (talk) 23:19, 21 July 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.