Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stay Stay Stay (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 redirect to Red (Taylor Swift album. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:13, 24 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Stay Stay Stay

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

Fails WP:NSONGS, no significant coverage from reliable secondary sources that aren't album reviews. Snuggums (talk / edits) 08:15, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. As stated in the last AfD, this is a charting song with sufficient content specific to the song; deletion doesn't improve our coverage. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:14, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Charts are not an automatic indicator of notability. This article is a WP:CFORK at best as there is no independent coverage of the song. Snuggums (talk / edits) 16:47, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, it is entirely incorrect to state there is "sufficient content specific to the song". The entire "Background" section is fluff about Swift's general writing process. There are also a scant couple of quotes from two reviews of the album, one of which is from About.com, a site which is has caused many frowns at the Reliable Sources Noticeboard. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 09:02, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:24, 29 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Natg 19 (talk) 00:43, 6 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Red (Taylor Swift album) per SNUGGUMS. WP:NSONG notes that factors such as placing on national record charts "suggest that a song or single may be notable, though a standalone article should still satisfy the aforementioned criteria" of "[being] the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label" (which this has not been). –Chase (talk / contribs) 20:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Redirect - The "Background" section doesn't even mention the bloody song! Also worth noting that the song has placed on download charts rather than the standard, much more noteworthy, singles charts. It is not demonstrated that the song has received significant coverage independent of album reviews. Nothing here that is not adequately contained on the articles for Taylor Swift discography and Red (Taylor Swift album). ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 08:52, 14 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 03:39, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect - This article does not fail WP:NSONG, as the song is listed on multiple national ranking charts. However, there doesn't seem to be any independent non-trivial works regarding this song that warrant it notable enough to have its own article. I think merging this article is the best solution. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 18:53, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It actually DOES fail WP:NSONGS for having no significant coverage from reliable secondary sources that aren't album reviews, though yes this should be redirected. Snuggums (talk / edits) 19:02, 15 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to parent album article. —Indian:BIO ^{[ ChitChat ]} 04:51, 16 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Seems fine. Everyking (talk) 13:26, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're an administrator with 10 years experience and you think "seems fine" is an appropriate contribution to an AFD...? ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 23:20, 17 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. You don't? Everyking (talk) 02:01, 19 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it is up to you. But "Seems fine" is just a vote. There isn't any policy-based argument, just a statement that you kind of like it. Properly, whoever closes the debate should ignore it. ŞůṜīΣĻ¹98¹^Speak 08:13, 19 November 2014 (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.