Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/This Time Around (Michael Jackson 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   no consensus. Wizardman 03:21, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

This Time Around (Michael Jackson song)

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

Delete and possible Redirect: Lacks notability, no music video, not an official single, appeared on a very minor chart. Might be worth redirecting to "Earth Song" — Realist  2  17:35, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep A track on HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book I that though not released as a single, received considerable airplay within the year following album's release. A news archive search of the years 1995-96 reveals plenty of WP:RS describing this song. Sebwite (talk) 15:51, 7 August 2008 (UTC)
 * According to the article it only appeared at #23 on the R&B chart so I don't think it received "considerable" airplay at all, "moderate" would still be an exaggeration and where are the sources? — Realist  2  02:49, 13 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.   --  Fabrictramp  |  talk to me  17:10, 7 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Wizardman  02:45, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

Keep There are a few more sources i would love to add, including an excerpt from an interview with the late Notorious B.I.G. on how he reacted when MJ called him to collaborate. i will try and add it shortly. Also, i dont see why it should be tacked onto "Earth Song", seeing as how it was released promotionally on its own accord.MaJic (talk) 20:52, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * If you could get sources (not fan sites) such as interviews etc that would help assess it's notability great. All we have at the moment though is a moderate radio hit at most, thus at the moment it doesn't warrant or need it's own article. Expansions by reliable sources will be a great help. — Realist  2  20:59, 13 August 2008 (UTC)
 * It's been a while and the article hasn't been improved. — Realist  2  21:24, 18 August 2008 (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.