Everyone Knows That (Ulterior Motives): Other than that, all others sources are not notable or constitute as original research Pyraminxsolver ( talk ) 04:59, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs , Internet ,  and Spain .  WC Quidditch ☎ ✎ 05:26, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment User:Brainulator9 listed this video from French TV channel TF1 on the talk page, if that changes anything.  AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk ) 05:45, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete : Seconding Pyramin that Rolling Stone is the only reliable source here, and I found no others.  Would consider supporting a merge/redirect to an appropriate target if anyone else has one; I had thought about lost media but that page doesn't have any examples listed or substantial mention of music, so it's probably not a good fit, at least in its current state.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 06:02, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Id recommend a merge to the Lostwave article Pyraminxsolver ( talk ) 06:20, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Was not aware of that article, but it makes perfect sense and already has a section on this song.  I support this merge target as well.  QuietHere ( talk | contributions ) 22:42, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Draft, I think with the French TV Station and time this article can be brought to standards, similar to the most mysterious song on the internet .  Microplastic Consumer ( talk ) 17:34, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Weak keep .  As mentioned above, there are at least two known reliable sources: the Rolling Stone article and the TF1 broadcast.  It's not much, but at least WP:GNG is met.  That said, it is on the thin side, and there might be merit to merging it into Lostwave (or another article that serves as a list of songs notorious for being unknown).  - B RAINULATOR 9 ( TALK ) 20:29, 17 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Lostwave .  ~~ AirshipJungleman29 ( talk ) 04:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Lostwave .  I'd need at least one more good source than the TF1 video and Rolling Stone article to feel good about keeping it, and a merge makes a lot more sense than a draft to me.  AllTheUsernamesAreInUse ( talk ) 05:03, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Lostwave , It's significant enough to be worthwhile to be as a particle but not significant enough to be an article at it's own.  78.190.59.94 ( talk ) 07:30, 19 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  There are two sources mentioned above ( Rolling Stone article and TF1 broadcast).  I also found a newser article referencing it.  I didn't look into the reliability of the newser article, but it's also an original article, and not just an aggregation; and we're talking about notability, not citations.  I'd say 3 sources is enough for WP:GNG .  Crystalholm ( talk ) 01:08, 20 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Keep .  Per @ Crystalholm 's point, it has gained two mentions in two generally notable perennial sources, and will continue to grow in its search to be found while gaining more traction on TikTok and Reddit.  More so to my other point, if The Most Mysterious Song on the Internet can have a listing in the same set of circumstances (not being fully found but of enough interest), this should be able to also.  -- Mechanical Elephant ( talk ) 07:05, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Merge with Lostwave .  The song does not have enough significant coverage from reliable sources to warrant an individual article, at least at this time.  Underclass King ( talk ) 11:53, 22 February 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Draftify &/or merge with Lostwave .  While I personally have an interest with the search, I feel the notability as of now is not quite enough to constitute an article.  I will say that the subreddit & interest in the subject is growing pretty rapidly, which means it’s likely to gain more coverage.  It could just be too soon .  Not0nshoree ( talk ) 23:29, 23 February 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: merge