Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/If You See Her, Say Hello

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 keep ; nominator is requesting merge/redirect, not deletion (non-admin closure; if I'm wrong on this one I'll take my lashings). KuyaBriBri^Talk 13:50, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If You See Her, Say Hello[edit]

No substantial content, sources, or notability for an article. Merge/redirect to album. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 22:19, 23 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD nomination was incomplete (missing step 3). It is listed now. DumbBOT (talk) 13:03, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- I'^mperator 13:28, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - I highly doubt that a track from one of Dylan's most important albums (Blood on the Tracks, 1975) does not have lots of coverage in either magazine articles or books. Also, there seems to be enough cover versions around of this song (already mentioned in the article). Missing sources is no reason for deletion. Who wants to visit the library? --Avant-garde a clue-hexa Chord ² 13:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy keep as the nominator does not actually want the article deleted. --Chiliad22 (talk) 13:35, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - you're right, but before opening a merge discussion we could make some immediate improvements (sourcing) and end the whole discussion. From the album article: In 2003, the album was ranked number 16 on Rolling Stone magazine's list of the 500 greatest albums of all time. The album reached #1 on the Billboard U.S. pop charts and #4 in the UK. If any albums are legit for having articles on all of their songs, then it's albums like this one. --Avant-garde a clue-hexa Chord ² 13:46, 24 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Evidence of non-trivial book coverage: [1], [2], [3]. --Chiliad22 (talk) 13:48, 24 April 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.