Jump to content

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Songs of The Monsters in the Morning

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 delete. Will recreate as a redirect per 74*'s suggestion, as this article has been around for awhile and "pointing-in" links are quite plausible. The Bushranger One ping only 00:56, 10 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Songs of The Monsters in the Morning

[edit]
Songs of The Monsters in the Morning (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

2nd nomination -- first was together with The Monsters in the Morning (2nd nomination). Absolutely no evidence of notability. Fails WP:GNG. Clear example of WP:SPIP. Unless an independent source is found covering this subject, I'm not even open to redirecting. Prefer delete, but open to redirect/merge for the sake of consensus. Levdr1lp / talk 19:56, 29 January 2014 (UTC) Update per Hasteur and anon IP -- there's nothing to merge. Levdr1lp / talk 21:44, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

From what I can tell, there aren't any sources independent of the subject. Not even a passing mention from a local Orlando publication. Surely there must be coverage of some kind if we're going to merge this content. Levdr1lp / talk 20:23, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete Keep or Merge and improve. Since the parent article has already survived AfD, this is just valuable extra content that can be used to better broaden the scope and breadth of a notable topic.Student7 has changed my mind. BlueSalix (talk) 20:38, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(Collapsed off-topic discussion)
BlueSalix is only here because we expressed differing views at another AFD listing. I strongly suspect he has voted against my position here merely b/c it came from me; I seriously doubt his vote is sincere in any way whatsoever. Note that he also voted to delete the parent article (The Monsters in the Morning), but only after I withdrew my nomination and only after we debated in a separate AFD discussion (the parent "Monsters" article has dozens of sources from reliable, independent sources -- from what I can tell, this subject has no coverage at all, so it's curious not only that Blue made his way here, but also that he would suddenly reverse his position and keep a subject with practically zero sources). This is beginning to border on WP:HOUNDING, and I ask that BlueSalix stop trailing my edits immediately. Levdr1lp / talk 20:51, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I'm here because I participated in the original AfD for this article. [[1]]. I frequently participate in AfDs, and registered opinions on 13 different AfDs in just the last two days as a review of my edit history will show. It's inevitable we'll, occasionally, find ourselves in the same AfD. No one is conspiring to get you. If you feel people are, I recommend you immediately bring it up to ANI so that the AfD can be kept on-topic. Thank you. BlueSalix (talk) 20:58, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Not buying it. Pull another stunt like this and I won't hesitate to open a discussion at ANI. Levdr1lp / talk 21:02, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Levdr1lostpassword & BlueSalix Gentlemen, you can't fight in here. This is the room Both of you should take a trout to the face and think about the less than civil things you've said. Levdr, your actions are specificly a personal attack and if you did open an ANI thread I would imagine that a boomerang would be what you would get for your troubles. Behave lest an admin come in and discipline both of you for your incivil remarks. Hasteur (talk) 21:07, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
hmmmm; okay BlueSalix (talk) 21:11, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict)I tried retracting earlier statements, Hasteur. I will try letting this go again -- if not for the sake of civility, then because you're quoting Kubrick. Levdr1lp / talk 21:12, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Radio-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Florida-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 21:31, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete and redirect to The Monsters in the Morning, though I'm not sure what sourced content could go to the parent show once that is done. Hasteur (talk) 21:41, 29 January 2014 (UTC) No content from the subpage is reasonable to merge into the master. But I do think the redirect needs to happen. Hasteur (talk) 21:27, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete. No indication of notability. Wikipedia does not and should not list all songs ever written by everybody. Maybe the top 10%? Or one percent? These appear to be in the bottom of any list, for lack of recognition, publication, and sales. Student7 (talk) 00:29, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Remove content then Redirect, plus also remove discography-table in parent-article. Do not merge content, do not pass Go, do not collect $200 in CD royalties. And I say this as a pretty hefty inclusionist, but WP:NOTPROMOTION and WP:SPIP both apply in spades. I suggest redirect for the sake of DahReadership, because there might be off-wiki hyperlinks to the "songs" article, which we should send to the parent-article on "the monsters" (wikipedia should not merge the song-stuff into "the monsters" because it fails WP:NOTEWORTHY ... but the parent-article has an external link... where the CD stuff *can* be found).
  I searched for music-reviews at the last AfD. There was one(1) ISBN book on amazon which gave coverage, but it is a reprint of several wikipedia pages (and besides was self-published by Beta). "Technically", these songs have gotten radio-play, on FM and XM, but only from the owners of the content, not from *independent* radio stations that I could tell. None of the articles I read ever mentioned the songs, except a couple of blogs, and even most of the blogs ignored them. The coverage the show gets in WP:RS says the are funny and crude; no mention of singing, good or bad, did I see. That said, if someone with the time to search on each *song-title* were to come up with some WP:NOTEWORTHY mentions, I'd be happy to auto-change my vote to recommend a merge of any such newly-sourced-material, at that point. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 12:20, 31 January 2014 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/enwiki/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Songs_of_The_Monsters_in_the_Morning&oldid=1138778679"