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 merge to Time of My Life (album). Courcelles 08:04, 3 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Every Time You Go (3 Doors Down song)[edit]

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

No evidence of notability. CycloneGU (talk) 03:02, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 17:31, 8 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:45, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MacMed^talk _stalk 21:54, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge into Time of My Life (album) The song may be notable due to its rank, but there isn't enough about the song right now to merit an article. Notability criteria for songs states that high rankings national or significant music charts are probably notable, but a separate article is only warranted when there is other information worth saying about it. The ranking of the single can be integrated into the album. I Jethrobot (talk) 23:29, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A merge would be a suitable result if there is content to move. A redirect is the other option. I'm not insisting we blank it and redlink it because someone looking for the song can indeed locate the album by doing so, and that is more sensible. CycloneGU (talk) 01:49, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm a little new to afD discussions and still warming up to what is most appropriate to do for a given article. Thanks! I Jethrobot (talk) 03:22, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Don't worry about it - we all learn somehow! We agree there isn't enough for its own article, but that a redirect would be appropriate. That's the main thing, and pending any other opinion suggesting otherwise, the most appropriate result. =) CycloneGU (talk) 04:12, 24 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect as above. Despite the single's initial performance on iTunes, the graph provided on the linked site only shows a bump within days of release, and it's most recently only in the 60's. I'm not seeing any independent coverage which would signal inclusion. Maybe it will become a classic, and we'll be wrong. For today, based on sources available, merge to notable album and redirect to that target. BusterD (talk) 12:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge into the parent album as per above. Coverage for the song in reliable sources seems to be limited to trivial mentions within album (p)reviews. I can't find enough material for the song to support an individual article at this time; it does not appear to meet WP:GNG or WP:NSONGS. Gongshow ^Talk 17:27, 2 July 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.