Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lie (Dream Theater 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 redirect to Awake (Dream Theater album). Awake (Dream Theater album) NW (Talk) 01:29, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Lie (Dream Theater song)[edit]
- Lie (Dream Theater song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
WP:NSONG tells us three things relevant to this nomination. First, "[m]ost songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article." Second, songs must must the requirements of WP:GNG, although placement on "national or significant music charts ... [or winning] significant awards or honors" establishes a presumption of notability. And third, even if a song is notable, it should only be treated in a separate article "when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article...." This song fails to clear that hurdle and should be deleted or merged into Awake (Dream Theater album).
A procedural note, hatted by the author.
|
|---|
|
This article was previously nominated for deletion in a batch with ten other Dream Theater songs, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pull Me Under. The closing admin, user:SilkTork, concluded that since the multiple listing was complex, the nominated articles agreed as the least notable should be redirected, and the rest should be relisted individually. Per this and my 21:56, 12 August comment at the previous nomination, I have redirected The Silent Man, Hollow Years, Home, A Right of Passage, and Forsaken, as there appeared to be rough consensus to delete them, and am individually relisting Pull Me Under, Take the Time, Another Day, Lie, Through Her Eyes, and Constant Motion |
- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 18:07, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- Cybercobra (talk) 04:22, 15 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to Awake (Dream Theater album) Unless enough significant coverage of this single can be found - I couldn't find anything but trivial mentions. Any info regarding its (lame) chart position can be put into that article. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 15:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep - single charted so meets notability. No need for even redirect, let alone deletion. Rlendog (talk) 18:52, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You're missing that notability alone isn't enough to satisfy NSONGS. Even if a song is notable, a separate article on that song is only appropriate "when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article...." With respect, you've only done half the analysis by focussing on notability alone.- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 19:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand that portion of NSONGS. But I view the details already included in the article as adequate. Rlendog (talk) 14:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- And in any case, your argument would support a redirect, not deletion. There is no need to go through AfD to create a redirect. Rlendog (talk) 14:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- There is no need to go through AfD to redirect, but it helps (because it forestalls the inevitable revert by someone who wants the article to stay), and is appropriate when either deletion or merge would be acceptable remedies. For myself, I think a delete is the better medicine. A delete and redirect redirect would also be fine; a merge and redirect would be acceptable. All of those results are common and valid results of AfD discussions.- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 14:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- And in any case, your argument would support a redirect, not deletion. There is no need to go through AfD to create a redirect. Rlendog (talk) 14:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I understand that portion of NSONGS. But I view the details already included in the article as adequate. Rlendog (talk) 14:22, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- You're missing that notability alone isn't enough to satisfy NSONGS. Even if a song is notable, a separate article on that song is only appropriate "when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article...." With respect, you've only done half the analysis by focussing on notability alone.- Simon Dodd { U·T·C·WP:LAW } 19:44, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 23:02, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete as an unlikely redirect term, fails stand alone notability per WP:MUSIC#Songs. As Simon points out, while it may have charted, there is nothing verifiable here that isn't already mentioned on the album page. Esradekan Gibb "Talk" 01:32, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Redirect to the album until more sources can be found. snigbrook (talk) 00:36, 22 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Fails WP:NSONGS. Album charted, but song never did. [1] Niteshift36 (talk) 14:55, 25 August 2009 (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.