Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Amethyst Deceivers

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. Enigma^msg 08:04, 17 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Amethyst Deceivers[edit]

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

Does not appear to satisfy WP:NSONG FamblyCat94 (talk) 05:28, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Per WP:GNG || Regards // 12LA 12:09, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 12:57, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @12LA: as the article is unreferenced, could you please expand on how it meets WP:GNG? The Mighty Glen (talk) 13:01, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'd like to know too. Please be aware that this is not a "vote" - you need to give reasons for your stance, or it'll likely be ignored by the closing admin. Sergecross73 msg me 14:03, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note - Upon further inspection, the user has been indefinitely blocked for either being a sockpuppet or just generally disruptive user. Sergecross73 msg me 14:38, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Appears to fail WP:GNG and WP:NSONGS in just about every respect. Browsing through the article history, the article has never been anything more than an unsourced bulletpoint list of times it was released, including its first release (an EP), and then re-released (a bunch of non-notable live albums and compilations). It doesn't not appear to have been released as a single, or charted. No information about the song itself is actually given. It's not an encyclopedia article even, just some random release notes. It's been redirected by two separated editors for being non-notable, only to be reverted on invalid grounds of it being "interesting" (which is a bit of a stretch no matter what your standards are, for a bare-bones release history listing.) Sergecross73 msg me 14:03, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - In addition to what has already been said, lots of bands stretch out the market with multiple compilations and live albums, and it is natural that their top songs will appear again and again. That does not indicate the need for a list article in WP. The band's article can mention the fact that this song has been re-released and re-worked many times. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 17:10, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails WP:NSONG and WP:GNG. It's eight years since a redirect was last made; I would have tried with a categorized {{R from song}} to album article Autumn Equinox: Amethyst Deceivers per policy, and I won't mind if somebody does it post-AfD. Sam Sailor 20:54, 16 May 2018 (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.