Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Spotify Sessions: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 14:39, 23 March 2018

Spotify Sessions

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

This is an unsourced and very incomplete list of artists who have recorded Spotify exclusives, and doesn't actually disambiguate any existing articles. Even if this were changed into an article about Spotify Sessions I think it could be condensed into a sentence or two and put in the main Spotify article:

Spotify has a number of exclusive recordings titled "Spotify Sessions", which are recorded specifically for the service by musical artists.^[1]

^ Porter, Jon; Langley, Hugh (September 9, 2016). "Which is the best music streaming service for you?". TechRadar. Future Publishing Limited Quay House. Retrieved March 23, 2018.

A (complete) list of artists who have recorded Spotify exclusives might arguably have reason to exist, although I personally don't think it would be useful. Jc86035 (talk) 12:24, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose this is a dab page. Are you proposing to turn it into an article.? In ictu oculi (talk) 12:28, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There used to be an album here of course before that was moved out and then converted to a dab. If converting the dab into an article not sure whether sources should be added such as The New Music Industries: Disruption and Discovery p 123 etc. Or merge the list into the bottom of Spotify article. There are a number of options here. In ictu oculi (talk) 12:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@In ictu oculi: It doesn't function as a disambiguation page, since none of the musical works listed ~~exist~~^{have articles 14:38, 23 March 2018 (UTC)}. I don't think there's enough content to warrant an article, or enough significance to warrant a list. Jc86035 (talk) 12:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
They clearly do exist per WP:DABMENTION. If you mean they don't have articles, one article did exist, someone had created one of them and it was squatting there. After moving out it was blanked. @Certes: might be easier to simply add to articles. You can bet that they'll be added eventually. In ictu oculi (talk) 13:26, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@In ictu oculi and Certes: If kept as a disambiguation page, I think the songs of each release would have to be listed and linked, since Spotify Sessions aren't particularly important releases and might not warrant mention in the artist's main article (especially given that many of those artists regularly do similar performances on TV etc. for promotion). Jc86035 (talk) 14:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Convert to a set index article? If we keep it as a dab, we should really disqualify most entries because the linked article doesn't mention Spotify. There's not enough prose or references for an article. A SIA looks like a good format for this page. Certes (talk) 13:04, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 13:10, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 13:10, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Porter, Jon; Langley, Hugh (September 9, 2016). "Which is the best music streaming service for you?". TechRadar. Future Publishing Limited Quay House. Retrieved March 23, 2018.

[1]

@@ Line 11: / Line 11: @@
 *'''Oppose''' this is a dab page. Are you proposing to turn it into an article.? [[User:In ictu oculi|In ictu oculi]] ([[User talk:In ictu oculi|talk]]) 12:28, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 *:There used to be an album here of course before that was moved out and then converted to a dab. If converting the dab into an article not sure whether sources should be added such as ''The New Music Industries: Disruption and Discovery'' p 123 etc. Or merge the list into the bottom of Spotify article. There are a number of options here. [[User:In ictu oculi|In ictu oculi]] ([[User talk:In ictu oculi|talk]]) 12:34, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
-*:: {{re|In ictu oculi}} It doesn't function as a disambiguation page, since none of the musical works listed exist. I don't think there's enough content to warrant an article, or enough significance to warrant a list. [[User:Jc86035|Jc86035]] ([[User talk:Jc86035|talk]]) 12:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
+*:: {{re|In ictu oculi}} It doesn't function as a disambiguation page, since none of the musical works listed <s>exist</s><sup>''have articles'' 14:38, 23 March 2018 (UTC)</sup>. I don't think there's enough content to warrant an article, or enough significance to warrant a list. [[User:Jc86035|Jc86035]] ([[User talk:Jc86035|talk]]) 12:40, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 *:::They clearly do exist per [[WP:DABMENTION]]. If you mean they don't have articles, one article ''did'' exist, someone had created one of them and it was squatting there. After moving out it was blanked. {{ping|Certes}} might be easier to simply add to articles. You can bet that they'll be added eventually. [[User:In ictu oculi|In ictu oculi]] ([[User talk:In ictu oculi|talk]]) 13:26, 23 March 2018 (UTC)
 *:::: {{re|In ictu oculi|Certes}} If kept as a disambiguation page, I think the songs of each release would have to be listed and linked, since Spotify Sessions aren't particularly important releases and might not warrant mention in the artist's main article (especially given that many of those artists regularly do similar performances on TV etc. for promotion). [[User:Jc86035|Jc86035]] ([[User talk:Jc86035|talk]]) 14:36, 23 March 2018 (UTC)