Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Am The City

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. —Sean Whitton / 11:44, 25 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I Am The City[edit]

I Am The City (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Non-notable. Song was never released as a single. No inline cites or sources means zero reliability. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 10:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many songs are available to download from many bands. Notability is not inherited. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 13:11, 18 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep: there are plenty of arguably less notable songs with entries. RobinCarmody (talk) 21:46, 20 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Other stuff exists is not an argument. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 12:32, 21 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It seems as if any keep vote will be refuted. –BuickCenturyDriver 10:58, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is. People reasonably expect consistent standards from any reference work, so that they will no what they may look up therein without wasting time. Precedents are created over time, and the fact that you don't like some of them is irrelevant. Abberley2 (talk) 20:53, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge and redirect to The Singles: The First Ten Years: article fails to establish notability per WP:MUSIC and the general notability guidelines. --Snigbrook (talk) 00:40, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's not the album I have it on. It is awkward and inappropriate to cover it there, when most of the other songs have articles. It would make that article badly structured and disproportionate to devote more space to the LESS notable songs on it, just because of deletionist urges. Abberley2 (talk) 20:50, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per nomination. Movingboxes (talk) 00:41, 22 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete (insufficient source material to justify an article of its own) and merge (with suitable ref, e.g. [1]) into ABBA unreleased songs, assuming that article survives its current AfD. — Pek, on behalf of Tivedshambo (talk) 09:13, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep It's an ABBA song, so sufficiently notable by wikipedia standards. Abberley2 (talk) 20:48, 23 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Citations have nothing to do with reliability. The impression of reliability they create in academic minds is spurious. Abberley2 (talk) 20:51, 23 July 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/I_Am_The_City&oldid=1142206511"