Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nine Lives (Def Leppard song) (3rd nomination)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.‎

The result was redirect to Songs from the Sparkle Lounge. $Salvio giuliano$ 19:32, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nine Lives (Def Leppard song)

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Fails WP:NSONG, I didn't find any significant coverage of the song. A duplicate article has also been created at Nine Lives (Def Leppard single) by the same user. Mika1h (talk) 18:36, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and England. Mika1h (talk) 18:36, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Songs from the Sparkle Lounge: Fails WP:NSONG. No SIGCOV in RS. Hopefully a WP:SALT gets in place too. UnregisteredBiohazard ^{talk to me} 19:47, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This was an important single of the Sparkle Def Leppard Album. Your methodology (which sometimes feels like personal taste) for erasing articles is not right. Please stop deleting articles. Instead of deleting articles, research and improve things. Regards. Martiniturbide (talk) 20:22, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
How is it an "important single" if it didn't recieve SIGCOV in RS? UnregisteredBiohazard ^{talk to me} 20:48, 18 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is a important single for the Def Leppard Album and it was the first Def Leppard duet that they made. Please research instead of deleting things. Martiniturbide (talk) 15:25, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support redirect as there isn't established notability in reliable sources for this song. death pact (again) 16:43, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The AfD notice is getting removed from the article. I assume it doesn't affect the actual AfD in any way? --Mika1h (talk) 16:50, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No, it does not. I have warned the user. I also redirected the illegitimate duplicate. If Martiniturbide continues, the user should be blocked for, say, 48 hours and you (or others) can make a report at WP:AIV. Geschichte (talk) 10:32, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
While you think I should be blocked. I think Wikipedians should use their real name. You all use your "mombo jumbo" language, and very long hard to understand policies to justify your excuse to delete content by calling it "not notable". Martiniturbide (talk) 15:51, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If you take a two minutes to read it, you'll find that WP:NSONG is actually a very short and easy to understand policy. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 09:06, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as failing to meet Wikipedia:Notability. — Fourthords | =Λ= | 14:30, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Songs from the Sparkle Lounge: as a typical WP:ATD for singles with no substantial independent coverage. -- Recon rabbit 19:29, 21 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
By deleting this article you don't allow to expand it. Please stop deleting articles with information just because you consider it "Not Notable" under personal opinion. This article was the first Def Leppard duet and it is also important for Tim McGraw — Preceding unsigned comment added by Martiniturbide (talk • contribs) 15:48, 22 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong delete and salt. This article has already been removed more than once. I was the closer on one deletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Nine_Lives_(Def_Leppard_song)_(2nd_nomination) I closed it, then created a fresh redirect to prevent simple reversion as had happened before, and yet here we are again anyway. Doczilla _{Ohhhhhh, no!} 00:48, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What are your reasons to do that? Your crazy "Not Notable" rules. I'm sure that many of the articles and subject you support are "not notable" also. Martiniturbide (talk) 22:53, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
redirect and salt: this seems a pointlessly circular discussion. If someone wanted to make a case for having a standalone article then they could start with a well sourced para about this single in the album article and someone might consider spinning it off from there. If they don't want to do that, then insisting that the album is "important" isn't going to get them anywhere and it would not be a good use of their time to do so. -- D'n'B-📞 -- 08:43, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The only argument I hear against this article is "didn't find any significant coverage of the song". I had included more sources and improved the article. I'm still against the "redirect and salt". Martiniturbide (talk) 16:11, 25 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.