Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/In my Craft or Sullen Art

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 keep. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:34, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

In my Craft or Sullen Art[edit]

Unless there's more context, this belongs in WikiSource. --smurdah (talk) 21:10, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

After I created this, I looked at the page history and noticed that it had previously been given a speedy deletion notice, which the original author subsequently removed: [1]. I've restored this. --smurdah (talk) 21:13, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I didn't agree that the article met speedy deletion criteria; I was simply restoring it since the original author (inappropriately) removed the notice. --smurdah (talk) 22:00, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any problems with the deletion; I would like to see it on WikiSource. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Brother Desmond (talk • contribs) 00:06, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Poetry-related deletion discussions. -- Raven1977 (talk) 05:33, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Aitias // discussion 00:00, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Weak keep - I've added a little more information, both about the poem itself and works which it has inspired. I feel it could be expanded into something more encyclopedic yet. I would have no problem with the text of the poem being removed and taken to WikiSource - it's more their thing than ours, but I'm pretty sure there's a potential article here. Grutness...wha? 00:57, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, there's some analysis here: [2] and I'm sure there is a lot more if I could see more than a snippet of [3] or [4] etc. Juzhong (talk) 14:06, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Definitely enough encyclopedic content there. The poem itself belongs on WikiSource and should be linked to. - Mgm|^(talk) 23:28, 28 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a famous poem there is enough criticism and sourcing available for an article of its own. DGG (talk) 00:51, 30 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Leave our Dylan alone. andycjp (talk) 14:17, 30 December 2008 (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.