Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don't Stop Believin' (Glee song)

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 merge to Don't Stop Believin'. Black Kite 17:03, 6 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Stop Believin' (Glee song)[edit]

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

Delete. There is sufficient information about this cover at Don't Stop Believin'#In popular culture, and typically, cover songs do not get their own article unless it is absolutely necessary. Don't Stop Believin' is not large enough of an article to require splitting of any kind. Chase wc ⁹¹ 21:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete or Weak Merge - Cover song which does not require it's own article. --Pboyd04 (talk) 05:19, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: So User:Pokerdance, it is ok to fight for keeping articles such as "Fashion" which was never released nor charted yet delete something that was sucesfull in four national charts. I understand why, as the article is not large enough but there are a lot of notable aspects on this page which have been put to use.• вяαdcяo chat 06:34, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pokerdance? Both you and User:Legolas2186 refer to me as a sockpuppet of this user for no apparent reason, and I am getting really sick of it. I am not a sockpuppet of any user, and if both of you continue with your incivility, I may have to seek administrative action. This is outright disrespectful behavior. But this is not the place to discuss. If you wish to continue with your sockpuppet allegations (which may I add are completely false), take it up on my talk page, not here.

And I have no editing history at Fashion (Heidi Montag song), and I don't get why you would care to bring that up. It has nothing to do with this discussion. Chase wc ⁹¹ 15:16, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No real reason for the page. A cover of Journey's song from one episode of a TV show deserves its own page? Doubtful at best... Doc9871 (talk) 07:10, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete particularly fails WP:MUSIC. ApprenticeFan ^{talk contribs} 07:15, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Chart peaks and week-ending download totals are already included in the "Don't Stop Believin" article. No need to split off this version with a separate article. Gongshow ^Talk 10:44, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge with Don't Stop Believin - Wp policy states that cover versions of songs don't get their own article. See Wp:Articles for deletion/Hero (X Factor release) and Wp:Articles for deletion/You've Got The Love for other examples. DitzyNizzy (aka Jess)|(talk to me)|(What I've done) 14:29, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 14:31, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Delete: There is no reason to keep this page--[[User: Duffy2032|Duffy2032]] (talk) 03:12, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: I don't know of any policy for cover songs being ineligible, rather it happens often. This version of the song by far passes the chart requirements of WP:NSONG; just because it was on a TV show doesn't make it ineligible. \ Backslash Forwardslash / (talk) 10:54, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Merge: The cover is notable and should be kept, but it doesn't deserve its own article and should be merged to Don't Stop Believin'. See the discussion re: Run (Leona Lewis song), the arguments for which hold good for this one. lone_twin (talk) 11:11, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Merge - This cover has received a fair amount of press attention, and as such is noteworthy; however, covers are not worthy of their own articles as mentioned above. This should me merged with the main entry. It should be noted that under wp:music it meets criteria 1, 2, and 3, only one of which is needed. Tigerhawkvok (talk) 11:13, 3 December 2009 (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.