Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Bet You Look Good On The Dancefloor (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 speedy redirect to the single's page. Will ^(talk) 23:11, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I Bet You Look Good On The Dancefloor (song)

Two articles on the same song. Someone must think the song and the single are completely different. Should be speedy. (What would this fall under, for future reference?) Rocket000 07:47, 2 October 2007 (UTC) Edit:This nomination is not a notability issue. This article is a duplicate with nothing to merge. I'm proposing deletion. Please, let's WP:SNOWBALL it out of here. Rocket000 18:55, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment See WP:MERGE. Best solution here, rather than AfD. --Folantin 07:53, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete anyway. Nothing to merge, we don't need the redirect (it would just turn up on WP:RFD eventually). I don't think duplicate articles fall under any specific speedy rule but maybe we can WP:SNOW it out of existence.--Dhartung | Talk 11:50, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy Delete per G6 Non-contorversial speedy delete because page is simply a duplication of information that appears on the single's page. Would the deleting admin please remove the tag to this page from the top of the single's page. A1octopus 16:57, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete and Merge. Fails WP:MUSIC. --Blind Eagle^{talk~contribs} 17:00, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Do you guys even read why an article is nominated!? This song does not fail WP:MUSIC. It's simply a duplicate. Rocket000 18:44, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. Actually, I had read your nomination and the article. In fact, I have read the article several times now and compared it to Songs criteria for notability. Perhaps I'm being dense, but I do not see the matchup and, at this point, still see a delete stance for this afticle is viable as there appears to be no notability displayed in this article. However, for whatever can be salvaged to be merged into the appropriate original should be done. I have added a merge stance to my original statement. --Blind Eagle^{talk~contribs} 20:08, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the article on the single. 96T 17:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, as I was able to wikify the article, including the addition of references. Seems notable enough for us. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 17:44, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Grand Roi, instead of reflexively !voting "keep" and adding irrelevant links or links that violate WP:EL to articles, why don't you explain how this article does not duplicate I Bet You Look Good on the Dancefloor, as everyone else who's commented seems to think it does? Deor 18:33, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realize there was already that article. In that case, please merge and redirect without deleting. Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:13, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, double edit conflict. I was just going to say the same thing. This has nothing to do with notability, which the song definitely has. Rocket000 18:40, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't realize what the duplicate article was until Deor provided the link to the original article (Thanks!). Anyway, I did find some review references that I added to the article under discussion that could perhaps be merged instead? Best, --Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles^Tally-ho! 19:17, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Yeah, go on, delete. Worthless.--Folantin 18:39, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete duplicate. Artw 20:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge and Delete, there's some material on the duplicate page which isn't on the original, but otherwise pointless. Jeodesic 22:58, 2 October 2007 (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.