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. Basically, the argument that inadequate sourcing exists for virtually all the entries has not been countered, and appears to be accurate. There is a lot of OR here. However, there are some songs that appear to have some actual coverage, so I am choosing to redirect rather than delete, so that if someone wants to merge they can do so. I'm redirecting to Spice Girls discography, but if anyone has a better idea feel free to change the target. Mango juice^talk 16:31, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of unreleased Spice Girls songs

[edit]

Non-notable unreleased songs. No sources/reliability. No context. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 16:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, GIRL POWER Astrotrain (talk) 20:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's not an argument. I think this comment should be disregarded. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 21:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is an argument, Girl Power is even an article. In anycase, the Spice Girls are the most significant girl band in the history of the world. Astrotrain (talk) 22:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notability is not inherited. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 22:53, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, The songs ARE notable and there existence is PROVEN. There are references, links, and sorces on the page which make it credible. Other artists are allowed to have pages listing unreleased material and the Spice Girls should be no exception. There is absolutly no good reason to delete or want to delete this page unless you have some kind of personal prejudice against what this page is about.Ofelixdacat (talk) 18:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You removed the AfD banner in this edit! Tenacious D Fan (talk) 09:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: I might not like the Spice Girls (and I don't), but the article has plenty of sources, including in a published book. The individual songs could use some references, though. Brilliant Pebble (talk) 04:41, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This song is a trivia list. How can any of these songs have notability if they have never been heard by the public? Look at the WP:OR here: "This song was written for the Spice Girls debut film during the Spice World recordings and may have been a possible tribute to the Beatles film of the same name." Tenacious D Fan (talk) 09:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Then remove the OR and keep the rest of the data. There's a good article in here; the article is just in bad shape. Brilliant Pebble (talk) 18:59, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of these songs HAVE been heard and there is not a lot of information on them which is why this page would be valuable for those who have heard these songs and would like information about them. In fact manny of these songs have leaked and can be heard on sites like youtube.Ofelixdacat (talk) 22:26, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: This is an important article and should not be deleted. It is full of facts and there are reliable sources to back up many of the songs mentioned however there are some bits which might not be completely true. This does not mean that the page has to be deleted. It just needs to be edited. As a Spice Girls fan myself, I learnt a bit I didn't know already when I first stumbled onto this page. I cannot let you ruin it for those who have not. BlazeFirey (talk) 22:55, 14 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Usefulness for Spice Girls fanboys is not a criteria for inclusion. Feel free to put the content on a fan-site. indopug (talk) 12:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Redirect to discography/band article None of these items are individually notable. Per WP:SONGS#Notable, "Most songs do not merit an article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for a prominent album or for the artist who wrote or prominently performed the song."
Enough third-party reliable sources (not their record label or Youtube) need to discuss the songs to warrant notability. indopug (talk) 12:52, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak delete Though I guess I'm okay with the concept of an unreleased song article (at least in the most notable cases), this one fails to attribute notability to any of the tracks and fails to cite reliable sources, at least for the most part. Thought the Spice Girls are certainly worthy of such an article, the article fails to live up to Wikipedia's standards for inclusion. Drewcifer (talk) 19:17, 15 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This article is more than referenced enough to be included on Wikipedia.Ofelixdacat (talk) 18:10, 13 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think forums count as WP:RS. Also, please keep all "Keep" comments in your original comment above. It is misleading to start another "keep". Tenacious D Fan (talk) 11:15, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn't matter, there are enough other credible third party sorces referenced to make this article legitiment. Th Articles of Deletion page of Wikipedia contains numerous articles which were nominated by you for deletion, A lot of which are totally legitiment. While you'reat it, since you have nothing better to do, Mariah Carey, and ABBA's unreleased song pages don't have any references or citeing eiter. Why don't you go interfear with the exisitence of those pages too!Ofelixdacat (talk) 12:35, 17 July 2008 (UTC

Other stuff exists is not an argument. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 10:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Tenacious D Fan (talk) 10:49, 17 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- Tenacious D Fan (talk) 10:04, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The material here is well-referenced and the volume of material cited suggests there's plenty of notability. I don't know whether the material could be better handled in some other article structure, but that matter can be dealt with through merges, not an AfD. Bondegezou (talk) 21:32, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with the above comment. Here is an example from the AfD article: "Seven Days (BMI Work #6229499) Written by Sheppard J Solomon, Mark Taylor, and all five Spice Girls. Published by Irving Music and R2M Music." That is cited by a link to BMI here. Please look at the link and you will see what I mean. These directories are by record companies to effectively copyright works. This is not media coverage, but rather a way of securing royalties if these songs were covered or played on the radio. This is same with the majority of other sources, like EMI and ASCAP. There is a degree of WP:OR in searching for these entries, and calling them 'unreleased' songs. What stage of development are they in? Have they even been recorded? This information cannot be found out by merely searching for copyright entries. This is my major concern about this whole article. I think it would be acceptable to merge any unreleased songs that have had media coverage, and are more than just entries in a copyright collection database. I would invite anyone to do some searches on any band in ASCAP etc and not find numerous entries of unpublished songs. For now, this article is a listing of speculation and highly non-notable songs. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 15:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- Tenacious D Fan (talk) 20:16, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. A bit too much of a combination of a directory, advertising of future releases and unverified. Overall there is a lack of commentary and secondary sources. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 03:47, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - lack of significant coverage in reliable sources independent of the subject. PhilKnight (talk) 04:40, 23 July 2008 (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.