Notice: file_put_contents(): Write of 412878 bytes failed with errno=28 No space left on device in /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Arsae/CacheManager.php on line 36

Warning: http_response_code(): Cannot set response code - headers already sent (output started at /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Arsae/CacheManager.php:36) in /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Models/Response.php on line 17

Warning: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Arsae/CacheManager.php:36) in /opt/frankenphp/design.onmedianet.com/app/src/Models/Response.php on line 20
Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Albums and songs - Wikipedia Jump to content

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Albums and songs

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Shortcuts
Deletion Sorting
Project

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Albums and songs. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion
Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:
  1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Albums and songs|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.
There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
Removing a closed AfD discussion
Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
Other types of discussions
You can also add and remove other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Albums and songs. For the other XfD's, the process is the same as AfD (except {{Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/PageName}} is used for MFD and {{transclude xfd}} for the rest). For PRODs, adding a link with {{prodded}} will suffice.
Further information
For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Purge page cache watch
Related deletion sorting


Albums and songs

[edit]

Call Out

[edit]
Call Out (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The article's second line, The single was given no airplay attention with the music video only available to see on the band's website for a limited time and on YouTube, is a pretty clear indication it doesn't pass WP:NSONG. Did a WP:BEFORE search of charts & reviews anyway just in case, with no results. Normally I'd suggest a redirect to album as AtD, but this title may be more appropriate for a {{R from other capitalisation}} redirect to Call out instead. Nil🥝 01:18, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On Top (Twista song)

[edit]
On Top (Twista song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Article has been unsourced since its creation in 2009. Doesn't appear to meet WP:NSONG, as I found no chart history (via acharts.co), and no coverage in reliable sources. Would also support a redirect to the album Category F5 as an AtD. Nil🥝 01:04, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blackest Hair, Bluest Eyes

[edit]
Blackest Hair, Bluest Eyes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I am unable to find much coverage of this album outside of passing mentions. JTtheOG (talk) 19:51, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The Seventh Life Path

[edit]
The Seventh Life Path (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Unsure about reliable sources. Reviews exist from Echoes and Dust (which I believe to be reliable but may be questionable) and Angry Metal Guy (unsure of general opinion but I seem to remember seeing it rejected before), and some other sources which I have not heard of. Charting is good, but is also already present at Sirenia (band)#Discography, which would make sense as a redirect target and render their placement here redundant if that's all the article can provide. Other than the charts, the sources in the article are primaries so clearly no good. Seems like a narrow case, but I'm leaning toward redirect. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:15, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Works for me. Thanks all. Withdrawn. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:48, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hal'lu

[edit]
Hal'lu (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The group itself is just about notable, I can't see how any of their albums meet WP:NALBUM. Yeshivish613 (talk) 13:58, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to The Rabbis' Sons. I cannot find anything beyond this incidental mention in an interview [8]. Katzrockso (talk) 03:21, 4 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How Did I Get Here?

[edit]
How Did I Get Here? (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NALBUM. On doing a BEFORE check, I can find nil. I propose deleting this and then creating How Did I Get Here? (Badly Drawn Boy album) as a redirect to Badly Drawn Boy discography; then, this makes way for How Did I Get Here? (Louis Tomlinson album), an album that does meet WP:GNG; hatnote can be added to direct people who somehow intended to visit this album (it has almost no views). (I'm sorry for making the RM, should've waited some more...) jolielover♥talk 04:18, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete There is no SIGCOV, no reviews or mentions. Katzrockso (talk) 05:03, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to My Living Room

[edit]
Welcome to My Living Room (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There's a paragraph in this book talking about the song: [9]. The NPR reference seems to misname the The Living Room Tour CD as "Welcome to My Living Room". Regardless, it's not significant coverage. I didn't find anything else for the song or the DVD. One source is not enough for notability. Suggesting redirect to The Living Room Tour. Mika1h (talk) 19:24, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Skies (Virginians album)

[edit]
Blue Skies (Virginians album) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are no sources in the article, and I couldn't find any when searching online. I don't think this album meets the notability requirements of WP:NALBUM. – numbermaniac 16:12, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Virginians (singers) as per @UnregisteredBiohazard. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 19:18, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

List of albums containing a hidden track

[edit]
AfDs for this article:
List of albums containing a hidden track (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There are many, many albums that contain hidden tracks, and I don't see any reason why we should have lists of albums that happen to contain them. These lists are essentially nothing more than a load of WP:LISTCRUFT. This nomination applies to all the pages listed at Special:PrefixIndex/List_of_albums_containing_a_hidden_track. Sugar Tax (talk) 18:41, 23 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:39, 30 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per WP:NOTDB. I'm unconvinced by the sources offered above. What we have here is a random selection of clickbait listicles. These don't really help demonstrate notability. What we don't have here is anyone attempting to compile such a massive list of these things (and even if we did, I'd be pretty skeptical of trying to maintain our own version). There's a giant chasm in between covering the general phenomenon along with a few noteworthy examples, and maintaining a list of thousands of every single time someone happened to do this. There are major OR/verifiability problems with this as well, as evidenced by the state of the list. Most are unsourced, and those which do have sources, tend to be non-RS. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 03:56, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    First time I have ever heard someone accuse a public library of creating clickbait on their own website. And I guess The Guardian was ahead of their time, inventing clickbait in 1999, more than five years before the term even existed... Rublamb (talk) 11:43, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I only looked at the first WP:THREE in detail. Finding them completely terrible, I didn't go over the others in as much detail. However, I see The Guardian sources are talking about the phenomenon generally; they could be fine in the general article, but not for a list. One of them even happens to list five prominent examples. That's doesn't justify a list like this either. 35.139.154.158 (talk) 15:20, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The first three potential source provided above include a NPR station (written by a music historian), an online music magazine (established in 2007 and with an article in Wikipedia), and a public library. WP:EVALUATE and WP:FIND provide helpful instructions on how to evaluate the reliability of sources. Rublamb (talk) 19:51, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep I thought the list itself was hidden, but realized its alphabetized. The existence of lists and some discussion is usually enough pass NLIST, even if they arent complete. This is rather large, and maybe could be pared down or consolidated, but I think it passes. Metallurgist (talk) 07:15, 1 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep the main List of albums containing a hidden track but DELETE the alphabetized pages and merge their contents after major reductions. Sources clearly exist that list various hidden tracks,[10][11] which means a list article is merited. But a massive pruning must be done by tweaking the inclusion criteria, for instance by requiring a WP:SECONDARY source for each entry, which would guarantee that the particular hidden track was noticed by the media. The current excessive listings are a violation of WP:INDISCRIMINATE. A pared-down list makes more sense. Binksternet (talk) 20:24, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete mainly per the IP vote above. For me, the sources provided above demonstrate the notability of Hidden track and do not prove NLIST (I'm not persuaded by low quality "best hidden tracks of all time" type articles). There's nothing to stop a very limited merge of particularly notable hidden tracks into Hidden track. Failing this I would just fall on NOTDB and WP:IAR. This is a gratuitous and unnavigable list which is poorly sourced and subject to OR interpretations of what constitutes a hidden track. Vladimir.copic (talk) 23:54, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I agree that reliable secondary sources are needed for each entry and have been working on it. That and any trimming falls under "can be improved". For WP:NLIST, the strongest source provided above is The New York Times piece, grabbed here from its reprint in the Miami Herald'' In addition to discussing the origin of hidden tracks, it includes several lists of hidden tracks, discussing them as a group. The Guardian's "Hidden Tracks" piece also includes a list of albums with hidden tracks. The public radio piece also provides a list. Even if you're not a fan of the other sources in the list, they supplement those three which are already enough for notability. Rublamb (talk) 16:47, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    As I said, to me these sources only demonstrate the notability of the wider topic. Both the Miami Herald/NYT and Guardian articles discuss the wider topic and use a few examples to do this. The sprawling lists we are talking about here look nothing like either of these two articles. A short list of notable examples at Hidden track seems entirely appropriate given that's how RS treat the topic. No RS (that I can find) however are dedicated to systematically cataloguing hidden tracks. Vladimir.copic (talk) 23:19, 6 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Pig Destroyer / Coldworker / Antigama

[edit]
Pig Destroyer / Coldworker / Antigama (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NALBUM, no significant coverage in reliable sources. No obvious WP:ATD-R target since it's a collaboration with several artists. Mika1h (talk) 17:08, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Salvio giuliano 18:38, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Previous WP:PROD candidate, ineligible for soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 23:23, 2 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Pretty much the only mention of this album from a RS which I found doing a WP:BEFORE search was Blabbermouth, and that article is just an announcement of the album's then-upcoming release. This is clearly not enough information for a standalone article. Leafy46 (talk) 04:49, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

New Stuff

[edit]
New Stuff (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I honestly don't see any indication of notability to permit for a standalone article here. The page has previously been deleted, but recreated recently. Yet no indication of notabilty that satifies WP:Album (An album requires its own notability, and that notability is not inherited and requires independent evidence. That an album is an officially released recording by a notable musician or ensemble is not by itself reason for a standalone article.) For this reason, i'm sending this here for proper consensus. But again, per WP:Album (Album articles with little more than a track listing may be more appropriately merged into the artist's main article or discography article..) Cameremote (talk) 02:32, 18 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Fade258 (talk) 15:53, 25 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Even if we assume notability is there, we still need to decide whether readers would benefit more from having a standalone article about the album or see the content in the broader context of the discography.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Owen× ☎ 11:59, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The subject is notable, as @Oaktree b explained. The content would not be served fit by redirection to the albums discography page, as there is no content on that page bar rote release information. If the content were to be merged into the discography page, it would be an undue focus on that album specifically as all other albums have their own article. Katzrockso (talk) 23:13, 3 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Rolling Stone’s article demonstrates there is enough WP:SIGCOV for a stub. Perhaps more sources can be welled up from there. MayhemStoppingBy (talk) 16:51, 5 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Album and song proposed deletions

[edit]

for occasional archiving

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Deletion_sorting/Albums_and_songs&oldid=1315501523"