Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/100k on a Coupe

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 redirect to Pop Smoke discography. There is no consensus to delete the article, however a redirect will retain the article history if such a time comes when there are sufficient sources to satisfy notability criteria. (non-admin closure) Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:12, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

100k on a Coupe

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not too many reliable resources. Article should be redirected after to Pop Smoke discography The Ultimate Boss (talk) 03:50, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. HĐ (talk) 04:46, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. HĐ (talk) 04:51, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Pop Smoke discography -- Much of the "background" section sounds like trivia. Only two sources for song reviews. This song has not even charted. HĐ (talk) 04:52, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: the song may only have a small number of sources, but the appearance in GTA being mentioned helps constitute notability despite it not charting. --K. Peake 06:27, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Being featured in GTA does not make it inherently notable, I believe. HĐ (talk) 06:59, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Pop Smoke discography a lot of trivia. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 12:34, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Kyle Peake. Enough reliably to warrant its own article. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 16:36, 14 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or delete. The sources here are second- or third-tier and being one of hundreds of songs in Grand Theft Auto V doesn't qualify for making this song important enough to warrant its own article. Wasted Time R (talk) 17:45, 15 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

HĐ and Wasted Time R I added more sources to the article. Lmk if you guys think it's better? The Ultimate Boss (talk) 03:48, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It's more of the same kind of sources really. The essence of the article seems to be that the artists thought it would be a hit and people in the online hip-hop world liked it ... and then it didn't chart anywhere. Kind of odd. That said, I don't have strong feelings about this one, so if it's kept, that's okay with me too. Wasted Time R (talk) 12:23, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 06:01, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Pop Smoke discography. Not really much here; could be reduced to three sentences in another article or something idk. Heartfox (talk) 19:11, 18 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Keep even if not a lot of sources are independent of the song, they talk about it in good detail rather than just reviews or other fluff. --K. Peake 06:29, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- You already wrote "keep" in bold above. Heartfox (talk) 18:18, 20 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - Discussion was relisted. --K. Peake 21:38, 21 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - Striking this as you can't vote multiple times in an AfD. A discussion is relisted to generate a clearer consensus, not to allow editors to reinforce their already expressed opinion (although you're welcome to add followup comments to your original vote). Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 18:07, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

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.