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 keep. Even if it were not notable, redirecting to the artist's or the album's article should always be possible. So Why 07:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Go to Hell (Empress Of song)

Go to Hell (Empress Of song) (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log · Stats)

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

Fails WP:NSONG for lack of significant coverage in reliable sources. - Mr X 16:33, 12 July 2017 (UTC) reply

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log ( step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2017 July 12. — ^{cyberbot I} _{Talk to my owner:Online} 16:53, 12 July 2017 (UTC) reply

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU ^(T) 17:23, 12 July 2017 (UTC) reply

• Weak keep: I found some sources here, here, and here. I'm probably leaning towards weak keep. KGirlTrucker81 ^{huh? what I've been doing} 17:27, 12 July 2017 (UTC) reply

  I'm not sure why I couldn't find those sources, but there does seem to be at least a possibility of notability. - Mr X 17:38, 12 July 2017 (UTC) reply

• Keep - Billboard and Pitchfork are pretty high level/mainstream sources, and they're moderately detailed articles dedicated to the song itself. Enough to pass the WP:GNG. Sergecross73 msg me 20:32, 12 July 2017 (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.