Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Won't Stop Now

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 Hallelujah Here Below. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 19:54, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Won't Stop Now

[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)

Fails GNG and WP:NSONG. The subject is the single, only one source is about the subject, the rest are about albums, tours, the group, which mention or list the the subject - the single; Sources are not IS RS for the subject - the single. Source eval:

BEFORE showed nothing from IS RS that meets SIGCOV addressing the subject (the single) directly and indepth. // Timothy :: talk 13:59, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 14:20, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:20, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of North Carolina-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 14:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think charting on the Christian song chart in Billboard would be enough for notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:21, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hallelujah Here Below: Agree with nominator's ref assessment, didn't find any other coverage, and disagree with Oaktree because the charting is not very impressive and not enough to convince me of notability on its own. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 16:49, 17 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Hallelujah Here Below: The above evaluation of the existing sources is correct. I cannot find any significant coverage and its record of charting does not merit notability. Rublamb (talk) 00:02, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: No objection to consensus redirect. // Timothy :: talk 12:41, 22 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect - Charting does not excuse a song from having to meet reliable sourcing requirements, per WP:NSONG. Agree with source evaluation above; GNG not met. WJ94 (talk) 14:00, 24 April 2023 (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.