Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Two Words

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 keep. Tone 13:32, 3 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Two Words

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

"Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability. 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." → one review by Spin is not multiples and that alone isn't enough. "Notability aside, a standalone article is only appropriate when there is enough material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." → I don't see how can anyone expand this article. "Has won one or more significant awards or honors, such as a Grammy, Juno, Mercury, Choice or Grammis award. Has been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands, or groups." → Once more this is not the case. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 00:10, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 00:14, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per above and talk page. – DarkGlow (talk) 00:26, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:40, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of New York-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:40, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per reasons already listed. Foxnpichu (talk) 17:01, 27 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep between Complex and Spin, the article is on its way.-TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 15:27, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Complex source is an interview with Freeway, an interested third partie. MarioSoulTruthFan (talk) 16:03, 29 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Tony the Tiger. Rlendog (talk) 16:54, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - the third party sourcing currently in the article is enough to meet the WP:GNG. Sergecross73 msg me 18:58, 2 January 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.