Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Parachutes (song)

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. — Joseph Fox 00:35, 22 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Parachutes (song)

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

I don't believe this song meets WP:NSONGS. IP Claims it charted but not sure how that's possible since it was released within the last few days. A digital download single off an album isn't notable unless proven, which I don't see. Shadowjams (talk) 20:05, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong Keep: This song does meet WP:NSONGS, because it has reached number 44 on the UK Singles Chart [1], number 5 on the UK Indie Chart [2] and number 39 on the Scottish Singles Chart [3] this proves that the song passes WP:NSONGS. Greenock125 (talk) 20:34, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Shadowjams said above that it was released within the last few days, when it was actually released last week. Greenock125 (talk) 20:41, 14 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 13:37, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - charted on a national music chart (link provided above by User:Greenock125), so meets WP:NSONGS.--Beloved Freak 16:48, 15 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NB - charting on 1 national and 2 minor charts does not mean that it meets the WP:NSONGS criteria. it currently fails on the notability and third party portions. Mister sparky (talk) 22:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: I wouldn't say the UK Indie Chart and Scottish Singles Chart are minor charts they are still important charts on the The Official Charts Company website. Greenock125 (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

just because they exist doesn't make them important. the occ website show every chart they compile. but whether they're important is irrelevant here. it still fails other aspects of the criteria. Mister sparky (talk) 16:37, 18 August 2011 (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.