Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lie Lie Lie

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. and none likely to emerge with another relist. Merging or not is an editorial discussion, no consensus to delete. TravellingCari 23:37, 1 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Lie Lie Lie

I am taking this to AfD because of three things - Article is for a Single/Song, Article is for a "promo CD Single", Article is for a "Digital download". Yes the artist is notable as a member of System of a Down and yes his label (Serjical Strike) is semi-notable because it is distributed via Warner Brothers/Reprise. However - is a digital download, promo only, single notable? Soundvisions1 (talk) 17:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC) Add on Comment: I am also nominating the following related pages:[reply]

Keep It's a single, that was first realeased as a Promo CD and digital download. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 17:48, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to elect the dead. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 18:41, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Yes I know what it was/is and that is why I brought the discussion here. Albums, singles and songs guidlines are what I am basing this on. In part: All articles on albums, singles or songs must meet the basic criteria at the notability guidelines, with significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Also more specific: Demos, mixtapes, bootlegs, promo-only, and unreleased albums are in general not notable; however, they may be notable if they have significant independent coverage in reliable sources. And in regards to songs: Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article... and Notability aside, a separate article is only appropriate on a song when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article. Do any of the above four releases meet the criteria is what I am asking? (And should the other three be added to this AfD discussion?) Soundvisions1 (talk) 18:09, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Didn't chart , wasn't the subject of any sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 18:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Merge to Elect the Dead. Stifle (talk) 18:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Empty Walls is a proper CD single, it charted as well. gracz54 ^(talk) 18:33, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Empty walls and sky is over have charted, so they shouldn't be deleted. - -The Spooky One (talk to me) 18:45, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - this is somewhat botched as separate Afds had already been created before this bundled nomination, some of which survived an AfD already. Suggest to consider seperately. --Tikiwont (talk) 19:50, 22 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Strongest Possible Keep for "Sky is Over" and "Empty Walls", as they both charted on several notable Billboard charts as seen here. Redirect "Lie, Lie, Lie" and "The Unthinking Majority" to Elect the Dead. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 13:25, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep "Sky is Over" and "Empty Walls". Both meet the notability criteria of WP:NM. Delete "Lie Lie Lie" and "The Unthinking Majority" as they fail WP:NM; non-charting non-notable songs. DiverseMentality^(Boo!) 17:48, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Just to clarify my rationale to everyone saying that two of these singles/songs charted thusly should be kept as its own article: Just because a song/single has charted does not mean it automatically should get is own article without meeting the overall guidlines. Guidelines for Albums, singles and songs say that if a song/single has charted it is "probably notable" however that is followed up with this - Notability aside, a separate article is only appropriate on a song when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article. Take the Sky Is Over article. What does the article say about the song? It says it was the "second CD format single" and that "It has charted". Then there are various releases of the single listed, along with a track listing of each. It has a brief quote about the song being inspired by a website, a section about the music video and the chart position of the song/single. The article is not about the music video so that section is more secondary information and adds nothing to the notability of the song/single. Empty Walls has more of the same - except this one has had more "releases" - it was first released as a "digital download", a "CD single", a "2 track Reprise promo", in an "edited form on promotional copies that have been sent out to radio stations" and an "acoustic version" appears on a limited edition of Elect the Dead. None of these releases would automatically make the song/single eligible for it's own article. Like the Sky Is Over article there is a "tack listing", "Music video" and "Chart positions" section. The information about the single/song charting is already part of the Serj Tankian article and the music video is listed there as well. Remember that "a separate article is only appropriate on a song when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article", neither of these articles show that the single/song has had enough "significant coverage" to create a "reasonably detailed article" about the song (Not the artist, not the album, not the music video - the song itself). Soundvisions1 (talk) 15:38, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Lankiveil ^{(speak to me)} 12:29, 28 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Since there are charts for digital downloads, the fact this single is one shouldn't be held against it. - Mgm|^(talk) 22:55, 28 October 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.