Talk:Again (Yui song)

Deletion and redirection

Let's discuss whether this page should be blanked and redirected to the main Yui (singer) article. I know MS thinks the title with (single) violates WP:MUSTARD; I don't think it does; and that the single does not meet notability standards; and I think it does. So let's discuss and get some consensus.

At a minimum, the page should not be blanked and redirected unless its content is being merged to the target article. TJRC (talk) 17:38, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

The title with (single) does violate WP:MUSTARD see here. The single does meet notability standards if you believe it does why don't you show how it meet WP:NSONGS? What content is there to be merged? The article itself says what is in the article. MS (Talk|Contributions) 17:52, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

MS, please WP:Assume Good Faith in your comments and edit summaries. I've read WP:NALBUMS; I've read WP:MUSTARD. Don't assume I have not. I don't see how you reach your conclusions based on them. Please articulate your reasons rather than blankly dropping wikilinks. TJRC (talk) 17:54, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Based on your edits it seems you have not read either article. So, if you have read WP:MUSTARD how doesn't (single) violate it? Also if you've read WP:NSONGS then you'd see where it said "Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song.", which is what I did. The page has nothing but the image covers and a track list on that alone it fails WP:NSONGS. Also how haven't I been showing good faith? I was merely asking you back up what you believe in. MS (Talk|Contributions) 18:06, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

First, I think you're operating under the premise that this is an article about a song. It's not. It's an article about a single; specifically, it's an article about a collection of songs released by Yui. It is not about the song "Agaain," it is about the release that contains "Again", "Sea" and "Summer Song". This is much closer to being an album ("An album or record album is a collection of related audio or music tracks distributed to the public.") than it is to being a song.

Okay, now onto the name. You seem to be reading "The most common disambiguators should be created using (band), (album), (musician), (record label), (song) or (composer)" as though it means "The only permissible disambiguators should be created using (band), (album), (musician), (record label), (song) or (composer)." But that's not how it reads. I see nothing in MUSTARD that suggest that an article should be mislabeled, i.e. as a song, when the article is not about a song, in order to fit it into this list.

Now, on notability. This is an article about a single, not about a song. The comment "Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article, such as for the songwriter, a prominent album or for the artist who prominently performed the song" does not apply, because the article is not about a song.

All that being said, if there consensus is to have a redirect to the artist page, that should not be done in a way that deletes the information that is now present. "Most songs do not rise to notability for an independent article and should redirect to another relevant article..." describes the end result that there should be a redirect to the article; it does not say to delete the content. To the contrary, "articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." You are in essence proposing a merge without merging.

Finally, I don't want to concentrate too much on your attitude here, but your comments such as "Why don't you read the gudieline."; and "Based on your edits it seems you have not read either article", particularly after you've been told that I have read the articles are just insulting. TJRC (talk) 19:39, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

None of these facts matter. Using your own source, WP:MUSIC states: "Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable." If you still want to delete this article, you might as well blank and redirect every single Oricon #1 single. Cooldra01 (talk) 10:41, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

When a artist releases a single track it is referred to as a single not a song. Why they want to disambiguate it as (song) is beyond me but the same rules apply. Saying that because it contains more than one track the rules don't apply is wrong. We can't say that because it has 3 track its close to a album because her label and herself didn't release it as an album and that's original research. There is no information present on the page that isn't already included in her article. So there is nothing to merge.

When I reverted your edit saying it failed WP:MUSIC, what did you do? Revert back. At that point you acted as if you never read or heard of WP:MUSIC because you wouldn't have reverted the edit. You would have left it alone as would anyone who knew the guidelines set by WP:MUSIC. And you saying it should not be (song) also showed you never heard of WP:MUSTARD because then you wouldn't brought up the whole "(song) is wrong (single) is right" nonsense. The way you acted lead me to believe you never heard of either guidelines. Sorry if you found it to be insulting but your actions said to me "I don't know what either of them are". MS (Talk|Contributions) 22:23, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

This is academic now, given your recent edits, rather than deleting and redirecting as you had been doing, so I'm not going to debate the issue further. However, I do suggest you read up on Wikipedia's policy WP:Civility. It's a core principle of participation here and your behavior here (such as your comment above, labeling a position that you do not agree with, or perhaps do not understand, as "nonsense"). That part is not academic. TJRC (talk) 05:05, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Chart performance

Is this section really needed? It's simply a summary of the following section and I will delete if no one objects Cooldra01 (talk) 10:43, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Again (Yui song). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090629125506/http://www.g-music.com.tw/GMusicBillboard3.aspx to http://www.g-music.com.tw/GMusicBillboard3.aspx

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:51, 27 June 2017 (UTC)