This article is within the scope of WikiProject Inna, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Inna on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.InnaWikipedia:WikiProject InnaTemplate:WikiProject InnaInna articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles related to pop music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Pop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Pop musicTemplate:WikiProject Pop musicPop music articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music articles
A fact from Heaven (Inna song) appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 28 December 2016 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
Did you know... that the refrain of "Heaven" by Inna is written in a language invented by the singer and her label?
This consensus of this RfC was to convert the page into a redirect. Am closing after only five days because the conclusion now seems foregone and the
snowstorm has no dissent. KDS4444 (talk) 21:44, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Should this article on this new song exist as standalone piece or should it be a redirect to the artist? KDS4444 (talk) 00:28, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I already converted this into a redirect once, but the original author undid this and claimed that sources would be added later. I have again turned it into a redirect, explaining that sources are required NOW for a standalone article, not later, but I am pretty certain the original author will undo this as well. Rather than begin an edit war,I am requesting comment from other editors: should this be a redirect or should it exist as a standalone article with two "references" to music videos and assurance that more substantive references will be added sometime in the future? Thanks. KDS4444 (talk) 00:31, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
If it's contested, you could take it to
articles for deletion, where consensus can determine whether to keep, redirect, or delete the article. That'd be a better solution than an RfC, I think. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:46, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
Redirect. Articles for Deletion has seen a recent spate of these short articles on singles. They generally close as 'redirects' to the album from which they were taken, and this is true even for singles that had some chart success. The rationale, I presume, is that there wasn't enough material to warrant stand-alone articles (and this same rationale would apply here, as well). By the way, the singer's article doesn't mention the song at all, so Inna discography might be the better target. NewYorkActuary (talk) 19:16, 10 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Which is my understanding as well: the only speedy deletion option (for example) from Twinkle allows deletion only if there is no artist page for a redirect-- extrapolating that a bit to regular deletion nominations, if there is an artist or an album, song titles for non-notable songs should be redirected to them. Plus, full deletion discussions take up people's time, which just ends up being wasted if the article can be turned into a redirect and stay within policy. I doubt the song would survive it unchanged, but I'd rather not bother the folks working the AfD list if there is no need. And I would be satisfied with a redirect. Thanks to you both for your input! Will wait and see if any others have thoughts before I take more action on this than I already have. KDS4444 (talk) 05:16, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to
WP:NSONG, it is best this stays as a redirect. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 19:41, 12 June 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
Redirect - Summoned here by bot. Redirecting the single to the album page would be the best option here. I don't think two music videos are sufficient for a stand alone article on one single song. ComatmebroUser talk:Comatmebro 21:16, 14 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Song's notability
To doubt this song's notability at this state is purely ridiculous. The request from above was made 4 days after its release, when I would likely agree that it should also be a redirect; however, this song definitely passes
WP:NSONGS. According to the guidelines, "songs and singles are probably notable if they have been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works whose sources are independent of the artist and label." In addition, the song "has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts." To question this article's status anymore is preposterous. Carbrera (talk) 17:03, 26 July 2016 (UTC)[reply
]
Bulgarian Charts
Someone keeps taking off the Bulgarian Chart part. I have 3 different sources verifying the song peaked at #11. The song undoubtedly peaked at #11, so stop taking off the entry. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Incognitopromoter (talk • contribs) 13:13, 8 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]
