Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rude Boy (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 no consensus. Cirt (talk) 07:51, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rude Boy (song)[edit]

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

Fails WP:NSONGS, community consensus seems to be to not have an article on topics like this yet: song has neither charted nor received the significant coverage required. Not even the single release is confirmed yet, the few sources that explicitly call it one are, in my opinion, not to be considered reliable, and have been wrong before. A redirect to Rude boy (disambiguation) is an alternative for deletion. Amalthea 11:14, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 17:39, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The AfD tag was removed from this article by an IP. I've restored it. Them From Space 20:42, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. --John (talk) 21:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The release has been confirmed at http://www.allaccess.com/top40-mainstream/future-releases highly reliable source —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.183.182.60 (talk) 06:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
... and it has since been removed from that page. So much for "highly reliable source"! Amalthea 13:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This would be non-notable as a released single, let alone an unreleased single. The three sources say "gonna be released", "gonna be released", and "shouldn't be released, but the artwork's tasty", but no more than that. Yappy2bhere (talk) 14:38, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, WP:CRYSTAL. I have also had to restore the AfD notice removed by an IP. -- Scjessey (talk) 22:10, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: While I don't agree that the source mentioned by the IP above is reliable, Rap-Up is reporting it today as well, and that's a source that I haven't had bad experience with before (even though it's not an audited magazine).
With this song widely reported as the next single, I'd now tend to leave the article in peace. Despite WP:CRYSTAL and WP:NSONGS, and while in my personal opinion this still shouldn't be a standalone article at this point, the song will certainly chart if released as a single, and it would certainly be recreated a dozen times until release in February if it were deleted now. I think it's more pragmatic and less conflict-prone to not go through with it.
Should the producers really decide to use another song (wouldn't surprise me), we could restart this discussion. Amalthea 14:10, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I would agree with Amalthea Rap-Up reported it and they are usually a reliable source. I am much in favor of letting it be until we do know what the third single will be. (Circusstar (talk))

That's not just wishful thinking, is it? "I am like 95% sure it is official I see it almost everywhere. When there is a very common rumor, unconfirmed, it tends to be the truth. Not alweays. But alot." [1] Helluva way to write an encyclopedia. Yappy2bhere (talk) 04:00, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: It is the next single. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peecee1978 (talk • contribs) 17:14, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: there are enough reliable sources.--SveroH (talk) 20:11, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reliable sources as in "sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy"? Name one. Amalthea 20:16, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
maybe rap-up?--SveroH (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As I said above that's a non-audited magazine, which I'd say rules out a "reputation for fact-checking". I haven't encountered false information there so far, but nonetheless.
I was actually hoping you knew one, to remove all those "reportedly" disclaimers from the articles. Amalthea 21:29, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: Song was added to Radio 1's playlist in the UK today and Digital Spy confirms it's release over here for Feb 22. Jayy008 (talk) 01:18, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Which means what, exactly? AllAccess "confirmed" the same date but removed it. Was AllAccess too quick to withdraw the date, or is Digital Spy simply slow to quash a rumor? Yappy2bhere (talk) 01:58, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Radio 1 have playlisted it. Radio 1 is the biggest Radio in the UK and doesn't playlist songs that aren't singles, obviously. Jayy008 (talk) 13:12, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Obviously"? Not to me, lots of songs receive some airplay without being singles, and many songs are playlisted while they are only promo singles (To my limited knowledge, at least). And FWIW, http://radio1.gr had "Wait Your Turn" listed for a while as well (not sure whether it was UK singles or US singles, I'd have to look it up) ... until they removed it again, and it never was released as a single. I don't imagine the BBC Radio 1 uses much more credible information for those kinds of lists. Amalthea 13:54, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've seen that Radio1Gr whatever it is, it's nothing to do with BBC Radio 1. BBC Radio 1 hardly playlists anything good let alone playlisting things that aren't singles. Once Radio 1 playlists something it's a new single. If you lived in the UK you'd know that. Since I do I'm telling you about it, it's definately the next single over here. Jayy008 (talk) 18:15, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly, User:Jayy008 isn't a reliable source recognized by Wikipedia. Yappy2bhere (talk) 20:21, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tell me, how is this song notable per WP:NSONG? It hasn't charted or won an award, it hasn't been covered by other prominent artists, and if the mocking Guardian review is any indication the article is unlikely ever to be more than a stub. How is Wikipedia better for having this article instead of redirecting readers to the album article? Yappy2bhere (talk) 20:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep --Aaa16 (talk) 21:47, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
because ...? Amalthea 22:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I find that offensive, I'm not trying to be "a recognized sourced by Wikipedia" my point is that if you lived in the UK. You would be informed about Radio 1. This is the next UK single. Unless you're saying if it's just being released in the UK, it's not good enough to have it's own article? Jayy008 (talk) 00:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What I said was, "Tell me, how is this song notable per WP:NSONG?" Yappy2bhere (talk) 01:47, 17 January 2010 (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.