Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Black Shuck (song) (2nd nomination)

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. Arbitrarily0 ^(talk) 17:46, 30 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Black Shuck (song)[edit]

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

No consensus was deduced from the previous afd. I have decided to nominate this article again in order to generate consensus from the community. The song meets none of the 4 criteria at WP:MUS/SONGS. Here is the previous debate with my cogent argument Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Black_Shuck_(song).

Criteria 1 The song has not been the subject of any independent coverage. All citations are taken from reviews of the album Permission to Land, therefore the album in its entirety is the subject. WP:MUS states The "subject" of a work means non-trivial treatment and excludes mere mention of the song/single. Therefore writing a sentence about a song in an album review does not indicate broad coverage.
Criteria 2 The song is not a single and has not charted anywhere in the world.
Criteria 3 The song has not won any awards or honors.
Criteria 4 The song has never been independently released by any other notable artist. It has only appeared on three Darkness CDs. It has not been covered or released by anyone else; see allmusic link here [1]. Bluidsports (talk) 00:59, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 03:09, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I have to agree with the nominator. There's no independent coverage of this song, it wasn't a single so shouldn't need article. It is badly written and should not use citations from the album to engineer a legitimate article. PC7705 (talk) 18:06, 21 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar · · 05:03, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to Permission to Land. Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 06:01, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Not notable in its own right, and don't see anything worth merging with parent album article. Redirect doesn't seem relevant either since the song has never transcended the status of being a mere album track on an LP. Toxic Frogman (talk) 09:27, 23 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. Patently non-notable. Peter Somerville (talk) 08:20, 24 June 2013 (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.