Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Back to Me (Marian Hill and Lauren Jauregui song) (2nd nomination)

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 keep. Sandstein 10:54, 14 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Back to Me (Marian Hill and Lauren Jauregui song)[edit]

[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)

I'm aware of the prior deletion discussion on this song and have read through it. I still don't think this meets WP:NSONGS just for charting at #195 in France and at 14 on a Spain sales chart (note that this isn't the official chart that encompasses all metrics). The album (EP?) called Act One has no article, information about the song could easily be contained at a possibly expanded article for that or on the Marian Hill article. The charts table in the latter's discography section doesn't even have 10 charts listed on it which is the ideal. All of this information is easily accommodated there. N Ø 10:38, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm gonna amend my nom a bit because it has been demonstrated below that the song does have independent coverage in reliable sources. And the article has been improved too. Great thanks to Aoba47 for seeking out the sources. I now believe the article can stay since the WP:SIZESPLIT argument I made doesn't hold weight when the song itself is notable. I do, however, believe that the Marian Hill article itself, as well as Act One, need to be expanded. Whether thats by copying stuff from here onto there or by other efforts. But that obviously doesn't mean this article needs to be deleted. For what its worth, this nom can be considered withdrawn, but I'll refrain from archiving it myself in case someone else votes delete. Regards.--N Ø 10:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It's not just the charts—that's just satisfying one criterion. It is the subject of multiple non-trivial works; Billboard and The Fader are cited on the article. It also meets the third criterion: Marian Hill and Lauren Jauregui are clearly notable. Having three paragraphs at Marian Hill's article would be giving undue weight to one song as well. I'm adding more to the article. Ss112 10:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:54, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 11:54, 7 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Here are some additional sources not used in the article: Fifth Harmony's Lauren Jauregui Joins Marian Hill for 'Back to Me' Live: Watch, Every Fifth Harmony Solo Single, Ranked: Critics' Picks, 5 Songs You Need to Listen to This Week, Watch Lauren Jauregui Perform Her First Single Live Without Fifth Harmony, Lauren Jauregui's First Solo Feature Sounds Nothing Like Fifth Harmony. I am not voting either way though, but I just wanted to provide a few additional sources. Just wanted to try and help with the discussion somewhat. Aoba47 (talk) 01:21, 11 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. This song is a chart single. It does not matter how famous, notable or how popular the song is. The song charted so there for my vote is in favor of keeping it. A song that has charted deserves a right to have a stand alone article. Welcometothenewmillenium (talk) 05:25, 12 December 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.