Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Twisted (Stevie Nicks 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 keep. Randykitty (talk) 10:55, 11 September 2015 (UTC)

Twisted (Stevie Nicks song)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Was PROD'd and author contested. Fails WP:GNG and WP:NSONGS. A non-notable, non-charting song.  Azealia 911  talk  21:37, 19 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. &mdash;&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·E·C) 02:24, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:34, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ☮ JAaron95  Talk  16:30, 26 August 2015 (UTC) Keep Newly discovered information shows song charted in Canada. - Visnvoisnvo
 * While the song charting does give it some solid ground, it isn't automatically a means of notability. Note that while WP:NSONGS states that songs are probably notable if they've charted, they should also be " the subject[1] of multiple, non-trivial[2] published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label." and alls I'm currently seeing is links to Fleetwood Mac fan forums and AllMusic, not one review, or reliable third-party source that discusses the song.  Azealia 911  talk  22:45, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Guess what! You said it was non-charting. Don't you dare delete this until more votes come in. - Visnvoisnvo
 * I'm not sure what you're getting at, like I said, a song charting doesn't automatically give it grounds for a keep... perhaps devote less of your energy into giving editors attitude and more time finding reliable sources so this doesn't get deleted.  Azealia 911  talk  16:13, 5 September 2015 (UTC)

Comment The Fleetwood Mac "Ledge" forum and the site it's based on are not reliable sources. I've said it often enough so I'm just going to remove them where I see them. This article is heading for a delete from me if there aren't going to be any proper sources which discuss the actual song. A crappy chart placing isn't really enough in this case. Bretonbanquet (talk) 13:33, 30 August 2015 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 00:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)

Weak keep Not a very well known song from Ms. Nicks. The only things I see going for this are the fact that it charted, the article at least has some sources, the song was featured in a soundtrack, it was the cataliyst for the reformation of the Buckingham Nicks lineup, and there is some information other then chart positions and the infobox. On the other hand, the song wasn't a smashing success, there aren't really any strong third party sites, and it's not very well known in general. I was initially undecided, but I feel like the article is notable enough to stay. Just barely. Dobbyelf62 (talk) 19:22, 9 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Withdrawing: This, along with the other deletion discussions sat in my watchlist are going incredibly slow as of late. While the two other articles up for deletion aren't really being provided any reasonable grounds for a keep, the new chart placements are a solid foot on the ground. May this be another stub for all of eternity. My withdraw means this can be closed pretty much immediately.  Azealia 911  talk  19:38, 9 September 2015 (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.