Sip It is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
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 articles
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 articles
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 articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women in hip hop music, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of articles about women in hip hop 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 hip hop musicWikipedia:WikiProject Women in hip hop musicTemplate:WikiProject Women in hip hop musicWomen in hip hop music articles
@VersaceSpace: Hey! I created this article because I felt that the Sip it article fell flat in describing Brazil at all. I am going to edit the sip it article soon to add more info as it is poorly made! I personally do not believe the songs should be merged as Iggy said herself that she is prioritizing Brazil more. Also, I do also feel I have added lots of information that otherwise is not available in any other article about the song. And Im not sure what you mean by barely notable, Most of Iggy's promo singles have wiki articles so I don't see why this wouldn't.User talk:FarisLloyd
@FarisLloyd: creation of articles is not based at all on the subject's priorities. It is based on notability which in a song's case is news articles or other forms of independent media discussing the song. Sufficient independent coverage has been reached for an article on "Sip It", but the same cannot be said for "Brazil". There is currently one independent source in the article you created. Not to mention it is very messy and needs copy-editing, which I'll start doing, but after I finish doing that I will seek a merge of this article to Sip It. versacespaceleave a message!17:49, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@FarisLloyd: Please do not merge this article. I clearly am not done with it and there is definitely a substantial source to supply the need for a separate article. I am a bit confused how you are claiming that sip it has more notability yet the article is extremely messy and lacks info. And I never stated that articles are based on priority, I simply said that to try and describe the need for one. Brazil also has a remix with gloria groove which isn't even mentioned in sip it and I am currently working on mentioning it in the brazil article. Again don't jump to merge the articles when it is not even complete yet. Especially because I have been spending hours gathering info and writing it out. Thank youUser talk:FarisLloyd
@FarisLloyd: all the information you just mentioned can be adequately described at Sip It. There is no requirement to complete an article, but you do have to prove notability before publishing. If you cannot, this is what drafts are for. additionally, i fail to understand why you regard the "Sip It" article as messy when the "Brazil" article required clean-up by me to adhere to the manual of style. please do not try to describe what you so clearly do not understand. it will help you a lot. versacespaceleave a message!20:43, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@VersaceSpace: firstly I very much do understand how wikipedia works, and looking at sip it compared to MANY different musical articles it literally lacks tons of info…and on top of that if it’s so “adequately” describes the song then it should’ve had Brazil info from the start not just when someone takes 3 hrs out of their life getting the info. If you cared this much and clearly think that sip it article is good then you would’ve previously added brazil info. Also i literally mentioned to you that the article isn’t done yet and I had to publish it because I wanted to add artworks and i needed to list what articles i’m putting it on so you didn’t “need” to edit anything after it was made clear it wasn’t needed. Thanks FarisLloyd (talk) 20:47, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@FarisLloyd: at this point you're just not reading. I never said "Brazil" was adequately described at "Sip It", I said that it could be, and that an entire article is not needed for a non-notable b-side. Moreover, whether or not you believe "Sip It" is a finished article is completely irrelevant and holds no weight in this discussion. If "Brazil" can be adequately covered at Sip It, then it should be. versacespaceleave a message!21:40, 27 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@VersaceSpace: The issue is it can also be adequately covered in a standalone article, It does not effect Sip it at all, in fact it leaves more room for sip it to expand on its info. The song is not "non-notable" when it did make some noise in the industry and really opened many peoples eyes to iggy and her music.
Support: this has been out for two months now, and there is absolutely nothing in the way of individual coverage of this song. Social media posts and its existence on Apple Music and other streaming sites is not proof of notability. Also, the addition of the two extra artworks violates WP:NFCC and should be removed ASAP. Richard3120 (talk) 17:19, 1 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support: I do not see evidence of significant coverage from third-party, reliable sources and the limited coverage could be kept within the "Sip It" article. It is not uncommon for B-sides to be discussed within the A-side's article. "Bikini Porn" is a good example of this as it includes information on its B-side "Passion and Pain Taste the Same When I'm Weak". I would think something similar could be done for this instance. Aoba47 (talk) 23:24, 12 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
.svg){kind=logo}
