Talk:Gotta Be You (Sugababes song)

Gotta Be You (Sugababes song) was one of the Music good articles, but it has been removed from the list. There are suggestions below for improving the article to meet the good article criteria. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 18, 2012	Good article nominee	Listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on June 13, 2012.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that the Sugababes song "Gotta Be You", according to band member Keisha Buchanan, is the first use of the crunk genre by a British band?

Songs

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Songs, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of songs on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SongsWikipedia:WikiProject SongsTemplate:WikiProject Songssong

Hip-hop Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Hip-hop, a collaborative effort to build a useful resource for and improve the coverage of hip-hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Hip-hopWikipedia:WikiProject Hip-hopTemplate:WikiProject Hip-hopHip-hop
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in hip-hop Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in hip-hop, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about women in hip-hop on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in hip-hopWikipedia:WikiProject Women in hip-hopTemplate:WikiProject Women in hip-hopWomen in hip-hop
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Women in Music Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in Music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Women in music on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Women in MusicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in MusicTemplate:WikiProject Women in MusicWomen in music
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Possible nomination for deletion

Rules state that a song article can only exist and pass notability if it has either charted or received awards. This has received neither. Aaron • ^{You Da One} 19:46, 16 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, firstly because that's not a rule, it's a guideline. Secondly, WP:NSONG dictates that a song can warrant a reasonably detailed article if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources. Chart and awards are not the only form of notability. Also, can u imagine if this information was in the Taller in More Ways article? It would be horrifically massive and uncomfortable. Till 01:15, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Till. An article does not have to chart to have an article. If there's enough notably on a song (which from a quick glance, I can see there is) then it's fine. WP:NSONGS states that: "However, many such songs, within that specific category, are notable and have long-documented histories of their origins, spread, performances, meanings, and lyrical variations. Statυs (talk) 01:50, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ty Status. Till 01:57, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"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." And you've changed your tune Status, remember this: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skin (Rihanna song). It has more info than Gotta Be You, and you was adamant that it should have been speedily deleted. This is what you wrote: "Sure, it is a well-written article, but it does not need the main criteria for song articles: charting and/or awards." So you are actually contradicting yourself. Aaron • ^{You Da One} 16:05, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Notice that was from October 2011 – nine months ago, one can change their view on the matter in that time span; which I indeed have. Statυs (talk) 16:20, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder why. Aaron • ^{You Da One} 16:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe because people's opinions on things don't always stay the same? Statυs (talk) 17:11, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But Calvin (or Aaron) - it states that if the song charts or receives an award, it's probably notable. It doesn't say that it must chart or receive an award. Also, the song meets WP:GNG. One guideline shouldn't outweigh the other (WP:NSONG). Till 23:22, 17 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Gotta Be You (Sugababes 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://www.webcitation.org/69xYMWvpE?url=http://www.musicomh.com/albums/sugababes_1005.htm to http://www.musicomh.com/albums/sugababes_1005.htm

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: 5 June 2024).

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) 16:08, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]