Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Letter (Hoobastank 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. Fritzpoll (talk) 20:00, 28 May 2009 (UTC)

The Letter (Hoobastank song)

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This single, apparently scheduled for a Australian release in June has shown no notability as an independent article at this time. Attempts to redirect have been reverted. Sources only note a video has been shot and that Australian artist Vanessa Amorosi is featured, neither of which adds to its notability beyond a mention in the already existing album article from which the song is taken. Until it shows some independent success as a single, the article fails WP:NSONGS and should be redirected or deleted. Wolfer68 (talk) 20:51, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete No sources yet, hasn't charted. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer)

Simply stating that the subject of an article is not notable does not provide reasoning as to why the subject may not be notable. This behavior straddles both "#Just unencyclopedic" and "#Just pointing at a policy or guideline".

Instead of just saying, "Non-notable," consider instead saying, "No reliable sources found to verify notability", or "The sources are not independent, and so cannot establish that the subject passes our standards on notability", or "The sources do not provide the significant coverage required by the notability standard." Providing specific reasons why the subject may not be notable gives other editors an opportunity to research and supply sources that may establish or confirm the subject's notability.

Just as problematic is asserting that something is notable without providing an explanation or source for such a claim of notability.

See: WP:JNN


 * Keep It is clearly notable  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 217.237.149.206 (talk) 00:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Thank you for just pointing at a policy or guideline. You'd have a point if I had just said "not notable" as my reason. I stated the specific sources in the article which do not add to the songs notability. Songs generally do not merit an independent article. --Wolfer68 (talk) 00:23, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Have you ever read that??? WP:NSONGS cite: [[Articles and information about albums with confirmed release dates in the near future must be confirmed by reliable sources and should use the "future-album" tag. Separate articles should not be created [b]until there is sufficient reliably sourced information about a future release[/b].

Hey, its a future single with sufficient reliably sourced information!!! @Ten Pound Hammer: How can a future single chart??? *Strange*
 * Delete As the gentleman just said, it's a future single. A future album 'might' meet the notability guideline, as might an upcoming computer game.  A future single is, however, more like a single scenario or level in a computer game: Not notable until after it becomes notable on its own.Tyrenon (talk) 04:07, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The duet Hoobastank/Amorosi is notable by its own! Should chart anyway! PCgo (talk) 05:20, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete for now anyway until it has charted then it maybe can be here but right now. Kyle  1278  15:05, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Release date of the simgle isn't that far away. I highly recommend to keep this article. Deletion isn't justified! - MausSchupser (talk) 19:06, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Being released as a single doesn't make it notable. --Wolfer68 (talk) 02:05, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Redirect - Not worth the hassle! Redirect to the appropriate page for now until it has charted. In some weeks this problem should be solved. BTW I think its already notable. V. Amorosi is huge in Australia. That duet is also quite interesting. Oh! "The Letter" is already the most added song on Australian radio and I reckon it will be another hit for Amorosi. :) >>> 217.238.194.251 (talk) 04:41, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Yes notability issues. Wikipedia is not a crystal ball. FumblingTowardsEcstasy (talk) 11:53, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Its labeled with the tag "futuresingle".

So it should be handled with care! 217.237.151.116 (talk) 19:52, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Just because it is labeled with the tag "futuresingle", does not make it notable or a reason to keep the article. Notability (music) states "Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable."

Therefore, it is not notable enough for it's own article. FumblingTowardsEcstasy (talk) 06:00, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
 * This song has not charted on any national or significant music charts.
 * This song has not won any awards or honors.
 * This song has not been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups.


 * Comment - Yep, right! That's for "Songs". You have quoted the wrong section. That's the point.

This article ins't about a rondom song on an album or whatever. Also most "Songs" weren't released as a single. They are just on an album. This doesn't make them notable. Its about a physical single! "futuresingle" is comparably with "futurealbum". A basic notability, with significant coverage with reliable sources is already given. 217.237.149.207 (talk) 14:43, 24 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - No I have not quoted the wrong section, I have quoted the piece of information from the "Albums, singles and songs" heading from Notability (music). FumblingTowardsEcstasy (talk) 02:10, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment Yes, you have!

You may want to read the policy more closely. The section is named "Albums, singles and songs". One paragraph is about songs, the remainder is about albums. The words are not interchangeable. Everything you have quoted is about SONGS. See Notability (music) This article is about a physical single! "futuresingle" is comparably with "futurealbum". A basic notability, with significant coverage with reliable sources is already given. Hope you got it now! 217.237.149.208 (talk) 02:41, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - Nope I have not quoted the wrong section. Songs and singles are basically the same thing on Wikipedia, just because it was released as a single, does not make it notable. Notability (music) states this "Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable." WikiProject Songs (a Wikipedia guideline on how to write a single or song article) also states this, where WP:SINGLE was redirected. Notability (music) is stating that released either as a single or not, a song/single is not worthy of an article unless it has &mdash; "ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been performed independently by several notable artists, bands or groups". FumblingTowardsEcstasy (talk) 06:01, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - Nope! Songs and singles are NOT the same thing on Wikipedia!!!

You really should read the policys more closely! There are categories for "Songs" and Singles. So it can't be the same thing on Wiki! See WP:SINGLE. This article ins't about a rondom song on an album or whatever. Also most "Songs" weren't released as a single. They are just on an album. This doesn't make them notable. This article is about a physical single! "futuresingle" is comparably with "futurealbum". A basic notability, with significant coverage with reliable sources, is already given. 217.237.149.208 (talk) 14:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - This argument is just going around in a circle, so I have posted a question about this issue and hopefully soon I will get an answer from an established user on Wikipedia, who knows the guidlines. FumblingTowardsEcstasy (talk) 02:55, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Is he/she evenhanded? Who's this established user? A friend of yours? Grrr... 217.237.149.208 (talk) 04:57, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Comment - see Wikipedia talk:Notability (music), where I have posted the question. Both answers states that WikiProject Songs are refering to both album tracks and singles. FumblingTowardsEcstasy (talk) 11:02, 26 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Yeah, but you have asked something out of context. 217.237.149.206 (talk) 14:52, 26 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - not notable. 121.221.200.219 (talk) 02:12, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Right!! You may want to read the policy more closely! Of course, its already notable! 217.237.150.207 (talk) 02:47, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete - as per stated above. 121.221.200.219 (talk) 05:37, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * KEEP - Also as per stated above. 149.208 (talk) 14:11, 25 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete: Not enough information to bring beyond a stub, fails WP:NSONGS on all other grounds: hasn't charted, no multiple cover versions.&mdash;Kww(talk) 00:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)


 * KEEP - Enough informations for now. YnosGer (talk) 03:06, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Anyone smell socks? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 04:36, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree, I smell socks also. FumblingTowardsEcstasy (talk) 11:02, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * You can smell what you want! See WP:SHARE YnosGer (talk) 11:16, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment - Please do not edit my post here. Thanks! YnosGer (talk) 10:58, 28 May 2009 (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.