• Because of this comment (I have seen this kind of statement listed all over the place for a while but this is the most recent usage I've come across), I think there should be somewhere mentioned in the guideline that just because a musician has an album available for purchase (or download) at a place like iTunes or Amazon.com doesn't mean that the musician is automatically notable. Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 07:41, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's clear enough as the guideline stands. The problem here it seems is that the people making these sort of statements are unaware that these guidelines exist. Pointing them towards WP:MUSIC should be sufficient, I think.--Michig (talk) 08:05, 23 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Notability for artists includes "Has released two or more albums on a major label or one of the more important indie labels (i.e., an independent label with a history of more than a few years and a roster of performers, many of whom are notable)." (emphasis mine, obviously.) Presumably an indie label that meets these criteria is itself notable? Is there a definition of notability for labels that I should be looking at elsewhere, or should I just work off that? For instance, I notice that GMM Records shows up in lots of existing articles about notable bands etc but doesn't have its own page (yet). Edited to add: ditto Silver Sprocket which is perhaps more notable/well documented, as another example. --Skud (talk) 02:55, 23 February 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Given that an article for a song should be a significant hit on at least one music chart, where do we draw the line on what constitutes a significant hit? Top 10, top 20, top 40? I would imagine anything below this (on only one chart) wouldn't be significant enough. But perhaps it's time to consider where the line should be drawn - or perhaps it could relate also to number of weeks on the chart? --Tuzapicabit (talk) 16:26, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Songs don't need to be chart hits to be notable.--Michig (talk) 16:37, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Michig is correct in that awards and multiple cover versions are sufficient to clear WP:NSONGS as well. The charting test in WP:NSONGS is a nice bright-line test, and, with very few exceptions (apparently songs by Beyonce, Pink Floyd, and the Beatles are immune to the test), everyone seems to generally agree that uncharted songs don't get articles. If we try to muck around with it, all it will do is cause more fights and won't actually change much. The only charts that people seem to informally agree aren't enough to count are the Bubbling Under and Heatseekers charts, but, if there's a decent article to be written, you won't get far redirecting or deleting articles about singles on those charts either.—Kww(talk) 16:43, 12 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are lots of other criteria that allow songs to have articles of course, but given that a charted hit is one of them - how well does it have to chart? I'm guessing that agreement probably wouldn't be reached, but I have noticed one editor (in the archives) say that he doesn't create articles for anything below the top 20, which I think is maybe about right. This is of course assuming the song doesn't meet any other of the criteria.--Tuzapicabit (talk) 02:16, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Everybody's free to have higher personal standard for when it's time to create an article. I, for example, don't create articles about singles because I don't think there should be articles about singles. Trying to reset the general line won't go anywhere productive.—Kww(talk) 15:17, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any chart position on an an official national chart is fine. However note that there should be sufficient information to make a detailed article. — Lil_℧niquℇ №1 ^[talk] 02:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reinforcing what Lil-unique said, for example if an album track charts from digital downloads/airplay, it probably does not warrant an article unless it was supported by artwork/video/performances etc. Adabow (talk · contribs) 03:39, 13 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Any chart position on an any official national chart? How about number 98 on the chart from the Republic of Malta (pop. 416,333). Also, what if studios start releasing chart positions down to number 1000 – is a song that charts to 998 for a month in the UK notable? I don't think it's a good idea to just have a blanket statement that 'if it charts, it's notable'. We should stick with the criteria 'multiple reviews from independent reliable sources'. LK (talk) 09:46, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Malta doesn't have a chart and the UK chart doesn't go as high as 998. For genuine charts see WP:GOODCHARTS. There are other criteria to songs and WP:NSONGS does quite a good job of summarising it. Something that does chart doesn't automatically become notabilty(think charting songs that has no or little other media covers) and something that hasn't charted isn't automatically none notable because it may still have a high cultural impact(think traditional songs before charts, unreleaased songs from big albums, national anthems etc). Regards, SunCreator ^(talk) 14:29, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just created the article for Patiently Waiting and i'm not sure if it is notable enough for its own article. It was charted on the Billboard charts, but it wasnt a single, so i'm not sure if that is enough for notability. So can anybody tell me if it is? Thanks.--Yankees10 21:21, 16 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I doubt it, but it depends whether you can find coverage in third-party sources. Adabow (talk · contribs) 06:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Unless you can find material to expand it significantly, it shouldn't be a stand-alone article.—Kww(talk) 14:21, 17 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It was brought to my attention in a AfD that a review of an album or song is enough to establish the significant coverage criteria, in that case I'm sure most if not all music is reviewed so how does it establish notability? Mo ainm~Talk 11:25, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It depends on the individual album. Most, if not all studio albums by notable artists are themselves notable. Other albums are notable if they meet the WP:GNG with coverage in reliable sources. Reviews are some of the best sources we have. Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:14, 6 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just created a user page and was about to make into an article. Before I do, please review this page and tell me if it meets any criteria. --Djc wi (talk) 04:56, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

To be honest, I don't think it meets notability standards. Jesusfreakhideout can't be the only source with coverage. And some of the links aren't direct references. For example, you use this link as a reference but all it is is a page summarizing the tournament. It shows nothing about the band winning said tournament. And the tournament itself isn't necessarily notable. :T I don't mean to rain on your parade, but...I can't see this article being kept. SKS (talk) 05:11, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks for your honesty. --Djc wi (talk) 06:10, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

They're on a national tour though. Doesn't that count? --Walter Görlitz (talk) 07:08, 7 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]