Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don't Make a Beggar of Me

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 redirect‎ to Frank Sinatra. The history remains under the redirect if someone wants to merge. Star Mississippi 02:37, 28 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Don't Make a Beggar of Me[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Nothing much on the page to suggest notability - i don't see anything else which would appear to meet WP:NSONG JMWt (talk) 14:23, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music. JMWt (talk) 14:23, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:33, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - As a song from 1953, online sources are slim but it does have a song-specific review at AllMusic (already cited) which is unusual. A Google Books search reveals that Sinatra biographers have discussed this song often, which is noteworthy for a guy who recorded several hundred songs. This one is discussed in biographies as either emblematic of tough times that Sinatra was going through that year, or as a distinct example of his work with various collaborators of the period. These matters are discussed in the books Sinatra! The Song Is You: A Singer's Art, September in the Rain: The Life of Nelson Riddle, Frank Sinatra: An Extraordinary Life, Frank: The Voice, Sessions with Sinatra: Frank Sinatra and the Art of Recording. With all that being said, I will admit that the article is unlikely to be much more than a stub, even with expansion from those book sources. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:44, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My opinion - fwiw - is that we can't really take bios as strong indications of the notability of works of the person under discussion. It wouldn't be surprising if a book of this type mentioned say 50+ of the songs they'd written, and I'm not sure that means all 50 are then notable enough to have a WP page. Again just my opinion. JMWt (talk) 15:00, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Extraordinary Writ (talk) 21:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The song is mentioned in several discographies for Sinatra, this is about the most review-ish one I could find [1]. I can't see that it charted, so it may not have had much critical attention. Oaktree b (talk) 01:08, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Merge might be a better fit if we merge it to the Sinatra article, seems to be an early song with some discussions about it in books, but not really enough for it's own article. Oaktree b (talk) 01:11, 21 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If merging, consider the results. His biography and life story would be sidetracked by an incongruously detailed discussion of this one song, which could raise an issue with WP:UNDUE. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:29, 21 June 2023 (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.