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 Loud (Rihanna album). Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 12:19, 4 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Complicated (Rihanna song)[edit]

Complicated (Rihanna song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Another case of articles on album tracks that fail WP:NSONGS. Even though the song did chart on the Korean chart, that alone does not warrant notability. The majority of this article is derived from album reviews, and per Notability guideline for Songs: If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created. HĐ (talk) 15:16, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. HĐ (talk) 15:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment. I would like to see the correct archiveurl to prove that the song charted in Korea. The supplied link takes the reader to 2012 but the chart position was supposed to be from 2010. I'm usually pretty good at hunting these things down (by tweaking the urls or clicking archive links) but the Wayback Machine doesn't like me today. Perhaps Calvin999, who added the link back in 2012, can figure out how to make it display 2010. If the Korea chart placement falls away as false, then I would recommend deletion. Otherwise, I would like to keep the article. Binksternet (talk) 19:40, 27 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• @Binksternet: Even if the song did chart, it is not a reason to keep the article, as indicated at WP:NSONGS. What matters is third-party coverage of the song, and most of this article is made up of content taken from album reviews. As with what I quoted above, the article should not have existed in the first place. The content of this article can be reasonably merged in the article for Loud (Rihanna album), HĐ (talk) 03:14, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I know what the guidance is at NSONGS, but I think if the song charted, and if it was mentioned multiple times (even in passing) by secondary sources, it won't kill us to keep the article. If it had charted at number 50 in Liechtenstein with nothing written about it, sure, deletion would be appropriate. Binksternet (talk) 05:22, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• I do not think passing-by mentions satisfy notability (like what I quoted). It won't kill us to keep, yes, but it serves no encyclopedic purpose whatsoever, when an article uses passing-by mentions cherry-picked from certain album reviews just to make up an audience-specific article with little educational value, which can be altogether merged into the "Composition" section of the album article. HĐ (talk) 08:15, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Loud (Rihanna album) - Thank you for the progressive cleanup, HD. Seems to have a bit of coverage from fan and B-class sources, but it's not really enough to warrant an article, neither is the pointlessly low chart position. Foxnpichu (talk) 00:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• The more I explore the Music-related WikiProjects the more articles of this sort I come across... I don't know if it is a fashionable thing for Music editors to create articles for non-notable album song, but I do hope that Music editors acknowledge that there is no need to create articles for every single album track. HĐ (talk) 04:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Loud (Rihanna album) as I cannot find enough significant coverage on this song to support a separate article. Aoba47 (talk) 04:12, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]
• It was also based on there being a specific interview about the song given to MTV. The chart link won't let me change to the date because of a website issue. Redirecting would be more useful otherwise you'll delete all the links about this song for the future inclusion on Loud if required. All of these articles you are proposing for deletion all have specific links about the songs, whether interviews, reviews, charts or performances. If you delete them all, the links will be gone and will be very hard to find again, considering most are archive links. You say these fail the criteria yet they all passed GAN and most appeared on DYK too HĐ.  — Calvin999 10:35, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Yeah, that is why I rarely !vote Delete in AfDs, because deleting gets rid of any content which could be reused for future dates. Foxnpichu (talk) 11:30, 28 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

• Considering the articles passed GAN before the revised version of NSONGS, it is natural that GAs can fail notability and need to redirect to another article. The interview as cited in this article for "Complicated" only provides source for one quotation, which can be easily paraphrased as a short sentence. I agree that redirecting should be more useful, that's why I can see two votes for redirect already, HĐ (talk) 15:35, 28 December 2020 (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.