Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Hall & Oates in popular culture

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. Mark Arsten (talk) 15:42, 2 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hall & Oates in popular culture[edit]

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

Mostly unsourced references. Trivia, list of covers, name-drops, passing mentions. No other musical act has an "in popular culture" list. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 03:56, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. "No other musical act has an 'in popular culture' list." You sure about that? Erpert ^{Who is this guy? | Wanna talk about it?} 06:32, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Basically no more than fancruft.TheLongTone (talk) 15:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete No reason the few sourced facts can not be placed (merged) into the main article. I sympathize as to the reason it was separated from the main article (length), but in general unsourced trivia does nothing to improve articles, or Wikipedia's reputation. 78.26 (I'm no IP, talk to me!) 15:38, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. "Delete" is not the right result here. If (as seems likely) it's concluded that there's not enough sourced material to justify a separate article, this should be merged back to the main article. --Arxiloxos (talk) 15:43, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the content is artists covering their work. We generally don't include every cover, just particularly notable ones. (For instance, if Artist X wrote a #1 song for Artist Y, then it's fine to mention it on Artist X's page. But probably not so much if Artist X only wrote one album cut for Artist Y that got only a passing mention.) Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you about most of this content, but not all. The information about the tribute album from The Bird and the Bee is clearly relevant, and possibly the "Koot Hoomi" tribute album as well[1][2]. And the two items under the heading "On the Internet and other media" are both sourced and relevant. That's why this page should be merged back to the main article, with at least these few items salvaged and restored to the main article, rather than deleted in its entirety. --Arxiloxos (talk) 01:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Popular culture-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:26, 23 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Doesn't seem to indicate how the specific subject "Hall & Oates in popular culture" is meaningful: trivia. OSborn ^arf_contribs. 00:46, 24 July 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.