Fantasize (Ariana Grande song): "Fantasize" is not a confirmed song title, all of the sources say "fans called it 'Fantasize".  None of the sources nor the artist confirmed that the song was ever intended to be included on Grande's 7th album.  The  information contained, promotes leaked music which is an infringement of the artist's right to copyright.  Furthermore, the claims of Spotify charting are unsubstantiated and non-significant per WP:SINGLEVENDOR .  Overall its full of speculation and WP:SYNTHESIS >> Lil-unique1 ( talk ) — 21:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions .  >> Lil-unique1 ( talk ) — 21:28, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment - I've culled a bunch of the unsourced and original research.  There's not a lot left, and the more I look, the more I see wrong.  Leaning delete, though the attention/streams it's achieved in its unofficial release is quite the feat.  I'm wondering if a passing mention could be worth it somewhere on her article.  Sergecross73 msg me 21:48, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The trouble is, we don't know where this song was intended to be.  Its best mentioned on the artist's page as we don't know what album or project it was intended for or when it was recorded.  Its not that unusual, "When Love Takes Over" was leaked by David Guetta and Kelly Rowland.  A bootleg version with a different production and different vocalist was rush-released and uploaded to streaming websites.  Its also impossible to verify spotify streams as they're not static.  When a deletion conversation is active, you shouldn't change/remove info from the article.  >> Lil-unique1 ( talk ) — 22:11, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The artists page is what I had I mind.  You're incorrect on that last bit though.  The article shouldn't be eliminated , like in a redirect or a merge type action, but there's absolutely nothing wrong with adding or removing content during an AFD, as long as you've got proper grounds for the removal.  (Info being unsourced, original research, incorrect, etc.)  Sergecross73 msg me 22:20, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment : Articles on leaked music aren't inherently copyright infringement, see New Body , LA Monster , Pissy Pamper , etc.  Furthermore, the song title being unofficial is not a reason to delete, there do seem to be quite a few reliable sources covering this song so the HAMMER essay doesn't really apply.  I'm leaning keep, but unsure as of now.  ULPS ( talk • contribs ) 23:51, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Agreed, being leaked isn't the issue, it's really about whether or not it meets WP:NSONGS and avoids any WP:MERGEREASONs .  Sergecross73 msg me 01:04, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Not having a confirmed title matters massively.  We generally don't keep articles or have for bodies of work that are unnamed.  For example "Upcoming Seventh Album" wouldn't be a viable page.  Given that the name of the song is not confirmed, this page should be titled "Leaked Ariana Grande song" which would not be classified as encyclopedic content.  As Serge said too, there's WP:V and WP:NSONGS issues too.  Some coverage from a variable quality of sources, single vendor chart (which isn't reliable for inclusion) and being named by fans doesn't equal official title.  The information would be notable for inclusion on the artist's page but not as a standalone topic.  And while a leaked song itself is not promotional/copyright infringement, when the artist has spoken unfavourably about the leak and confirmed it was unfinished, and the article was written like  fansite/promotional tone, there is reason to ask why its on Wkipedia.  >> Lil-unique1 ( talk ) — 11:19, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] We generally do not because they are unlikely notable, but it's not against any guidelines.  Look at Upcoming Ariana Grande album or Upcoming Playboi Carti album .  Many artists have spoken about hating leaks, to go back to my earlier examples look at Kanye West, many of his leaked songs get articles, and even a leaked album had a page before being merged.  Just because they don't like it, we shouldn't delete.  The NSONGS issues are the only ones keeping me from saying keep, I'll do some more thinking.  ULPS ( talk • contribs ) 16:48, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] The thing is, I did state that “Fantasize” was a fan-made title.  A note next to the song’s title saying that the song was not named before leaking could work— But, I do think that the page should exist though since well, the song was illegally uploaded to streaming services and was able to chart on various Spotify Charts and “ apparently ” has been played on radio too.  LUVGALORE ( talk ) 23:57, 14 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Spotify charts are not valid per WP:SINGLEVENDOR .  Additionally, those chart positions cannot be verified.  And we shouldn't call a topic by the name fans have given to it when its a body of work and its actual title doesn't exist/isn't known.  That's WP:SPECULATION and not verifiable .  >> Lil-unique1 ( talk ) — 11:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and relegate it to a passing mention in the Ariana Grande article.  FWIW I think Teen Vogue and Uproxx are the only reliable publications used in the article, and right now, the topic does not have enough coverage in enough RS to warrant an article.  ‍ ‍ Elias 🌊 ‍ ‍ 💬 " Will you call me? " 📝 " Will you hang me out to dry? " 00:05, 16 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : As noted above, the song has limited RS and it does not appear to meet WP:NSONG .  Underclass King ( talk ) 04:34, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete for now, per my arguments above.  There's too little sourcing or (verifiable) content to warrant a stand-alone article being split off like this.  Not opposed to a sourced mention at the parent article, but due to unofficial title and unwieldy disambiguation needed with it, I don't think even really think a redirect is plausible.  Sergecross73 msg me 21:30, 17 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : I agree with the above discussion.  The topic does not meet WP:NSONG .  I do not think a redirect would applicable in this case per Sergecross73's comments.  Aoba47 ( talk ) 14:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete - Don't agree with all arguments of nom as stated in my comments, but after searching a little its evident there isn't enough coverage to justify a separate article, perhaps a mention in the album it was originally meant for (not sure what this is, I'm sure someone with more knowledge could figure this out) and/or a mention in Ariana's page.  ULPS ( talk • contribs ) 01:04, 19 January 2024 (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.

Discussion outcome: delete