Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crack the Shutters

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. Spartaz ^Humbug! 17:41, 4 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crack the Shutters

WP:CRYSTAL violation; unsourced and speculative. Orange Mike | Talk 02:03, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Confirmed by the band's official website as the second single, which is for me to confirm its existence. I have added that link as reference on the page. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 04:43, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to A Hundred Million Suns until release of the single. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 15:15, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. A single has to chart to be considered notable, and this hasn't even been released yet. —BradV 05:36, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. It's almost certain to be a hit single in a few weeks time. Deletion now seems rather pointless.--Michig (talk) 08:08, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If it is a hit single in a few weeks time, the article can be recreated. Schuym1 (talk) 17:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Their last ten singles have all been top 40 hits - there seems little doubt that this one will be a hit. If it is deleted at least move it into the creator's userspace so that they can move it back 2 weeks later rather than having to rewrite it.--Michig (talk) 11:48, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: per WP:MUSIC. Schuym1 (talk) 17:33, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: the notability guidelines for singles says it does not violate WP:CRYSTAL if there are reliable sources to confirm the single's release date and track listing, which is why I refer you to exhibits A, which happens to be their label's website, B, C, D, and E, the band's website. Y2kcrazyjoker4 (talk) 21:14, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- None of those sources show WP:NOTABILITY and it still also doesn't pass WP:MUSIC. Also, two of those links aren't reliable. All you did was show that it will be released, not the single's notability.Schuym1 (talk) 21:30, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:MUSIC says: "Separate articles should not be created until there is sufficient reliably sourced information about a future release." I do not consider a name and track listing alone sufficient information. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:05, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, redirecting this to A Hundred Million Suns would be reasonable until (and if) the song charts. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 22:07, 29 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 04:28, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per WP:CRYSTAL & WP:MUSIC#Songs. Does it exist: yes. Is it notable: no. Esradekan Gibb ^"Talk" 11:31, 30 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I'm not sure how exactly does this violate WP:MUSIC or more specifically WP:NSONGS. The guideline simply requires "sufficient reliably sourced information about a future release" of a single. There are multiple sources confirming the release of the single (here's one more from MTV if sources provided by Y2kcrazyjoker4 aren't enough); the video has already been released. Nor is there significant period until the release such that it would grossly violate WP:CRYSTAL. Nor is this some stray single of some obscure band that won't receive any media or chart coverage. ^LeaveSleaves _talk 13:47, 2 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: notability not established, per WP:CRYSTAL. JamesBurns (talk) 05:25, 3 December 2008 (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.