Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Holy Shit (You've Got to Vote)

Holy Shit (You've Got to Vote)

[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)

The subject does not pass our notability standards. Not a notable song per WP:NSONG and the video is not notable Lightburst (talk) 12:58, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 12:58, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 12:58, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions. Lightburst (talk) 12:58, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - I was able to find some pretty high level reliable source coverage pretty easily, both in and outside of the music industry. The Vanity Fair source even makes claims that stunts such as this may have negatively affected voter turnout in the 2016 US Election. I assume this was just a failure to follow through on WP:BEFORE. Sergecross73 msg me 13:56, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Sergecross73: I did a before. It is easy to get attention with a profane song about Trump. I suspect whether this article is kept or deleted may also depend on your politics WP:NETRUMP like this lyric...Donald Trump is human syphilis. Sometimes WP:IAR is a good option. Lightburst (talk) 14:06, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

None of that is relevant. NETTRUMP (an essay) says Not every single thing Donald Trump does deserves an article. If the latest outrage has no significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, it is presumed not to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list. To summarize, the subject you’ve nominated is not something Trump did, and it is covered by reliable sources. It’s the opposite of NETTRUMP. Your defense of the nom is even worse than the nom itself. It easily meets the WP:GNG with this level of sourcing. Sergecross73 msg me 14:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry that you are upset with the nomination. I cited an essay about Trump and it was the only semi-humorous essay I could find which is tangentially relatable - we often use essays in AfDs WP:FANCRUFT etc. I do not think the article warrants inclusion in an encyclopedia. The article was prodded when I saw it this am, so I am sure I am not alone in my determination. We determine notability in this way. Soon enough there will be a consensus so there is no need to get cross. And I did cite a policy WP:IAR. So we disagree. I will retreat from the AfD unless I am pinged. Cheers! Lightburst (talk) 16:16, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I’m not upset. Just pointing out all the flaws in the nomination and subsequent doubling down on its defense. You also haven’t given any valid reason to invoke IAR. The irony here is that you seem to be the only one treading on any WP:ATAs, your response to all these mainstream reliable sources feels like a mix of WP:NOTNOTABLE and WP:IDONTLIKEIT violations. Sergecross73 msg me 17:35, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Sergecross73. I think there is a sufficient coverage in sources of this particular Holy Shit. Yes, it is related to US politics and certain politicians, which only makes it more notable. My very best wishes (talk) 15:21, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Hollywood Reporter, Billboard, Vanity Fair and Time: obviously reliable, independent sources, speaking about the topic directly and in detail. The rest is WP:IDONTLIKEIT. — Toughpigs (talk) 17:59, 18 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It needs a little expansion. Nonetheless, with reliable sources indicated above, the article is good enough to pass WP:NSONG. ASTIG😎 _{(ICE T • ICE CUBE)} 16:00, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Wikipedia is not a newspaper. Just because something gets coverage in light of it being part of a much bigger event does not mean it itself is notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 17:41, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, you’re citing WP:NOTNEWSPAPER for...a song...? That received dedicated reliable source coverage in and outside of the music industry? In very mainstream sources? That doesn’t make any sense. Sergecross73 msg me 00:22, 21 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nomination That man from Nantucket (talk) 06:02, 25 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]