Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Yoko Ono (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. No prejudice against redirecting. S warm  ♠  21:26, 8 September 2015 (UTC)

Yoko Ono (song)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Does not appear to be notable. Nowa (talk) 07:56, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep: appears to have charted in both Germany and Austria. Karst (talk) 15:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * That would be fine if it is indeed notable. Can you provide a reference that talks about the song? We need a good reference for the article.--Nowa (talk) 18:46, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:02, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. North America1000 22:02, 16 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep It did chart in multiple countries. It passes notability guidelines. The Undead Never Die (talk) 00:52, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I reviewed WP:NSONG and I see where it says that a song may be notable if it has charted, but I think we are still a long way away from “multiple, non-trivial published works”. Is it common for a song to chart and yet for no one to write about it?  I have nothing against the song or the band.  This article came to my attention when I was working on Yoko Ono.  That article mentioned this song but when I could not find any articles that discussed this song, I removed it from that article.   When I could't find anything at all about the song, I thought that perhaps a stand alone article was not warranted.--Nowa (talk) 06:19, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * By the way, I did find this reference --Nowa (talk) 06:33, 17 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Runter mit den Spendierhosen, Unsichtbarer!. While it may have charted (barely), NSONG is dependent on the song actually passing GNG (which it doesn't seem to do). Primefac (talk) 10:47, 17 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm good with redirect.--Nowa (talk) 17:15, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ☮ JAaron95  Talk  03:50, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Runter mit den Spendierhosen, Unsichtbarer!, with information such as the charting placement of the single and other details being moved over there? That seems like the best approach. CoffeeWithMarkets (talk) 04:33, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep charting songs are notable, per WP:NSONG "The following factors suggest that a song or single may be notable, though a standalone article should still satisfy the aforementioned criteria. # 1 Has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts." that means coverage is needed to write a stand-alone article, coverage is there, refs are there, info is in the article, could be added more, but it's out of reach at AfD. It's notable also for having been the shortest ever music video on MTV (47 seconds) and possibly the shortest ever charting song (31 seconds), although the whole EP has a little more music. Kraxler (talk) 18:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Could you provide a reference for shortest ever music video on MTV? The article used to claim that the song was in the Guinness Book of World Records for shortest ever song.  I checked online, however, and Guinness doesn't have “shortest song” as a category.  That has made me suspicious of all claims of notability relative to the song's length.Nowa (talk) 07:54, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The German-language source (published by "Rhein-Zeitung" in Koblenz) has a quote by the singer of this group who says that they are in the Guinness-Book with their video, not the song, he says it is "the shortest video ever made seriously and shown on TV", but it might be just a joke. Kraxler (talk) 16:00, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Guinness World Records doesn't seem to have a "shortest music video" category.--Nowa (talk) 17:42, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, it wouldn't make sense to have such a category, I'm confident that it was a joke. It may have been the "shortest music video ever shown on MTV as a separate complete piece of music", but to assume that would be OR. Back to the topic, the record passes NSONG because of the chart position. Kraxler (talk) 16:14, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Delete. All of the sourced information is already in the album and discography articles. If there's nothing more that can be said and properly sourced an article isn't justified. Redirect it to the album if you think this disambiguated title is going to be useful as a redirect. --Michig (talk) 07:23, 30 August 2015 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — ☮ JAaron95  Talk  09:13, 30 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete per Michig. At best, useless article. WP:NSONG should be used with common sense, and placing 46th in the German chart is not enough to justify a standalone article. It could be eventually redirected to Die Ärzte discography which includes the charting informations for the single. Cavarrone 10:57, 4 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete or redirect (although I personally wouldn't waste the time). While charting can mean a song is notable, it doesn't automatically make it notable, as pointed out by Primefac.  Onel 5969  TT me 15:00, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
 * It was averaging about 8 hits a day prior to the deletion discussion. I think a redirect would be worthwhile. Nowa (talk) 06:39, 8 September 2015 (UTC)


 * Redirect to album. Insufficient reliable sourcing present to justify passing NSONG. A reasonable search doesn't help. BusterD (talk) 03:56, 8 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.