Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/(Would I Still Be) Her Big Man


 * 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 Speedy keep. Nominator breached interaction ban. Fences &amp;  Windows  22:28, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

(Would I Still Be) Her Big Man

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Irrelevant song which produced no noteworthy awards or chart positions. Band itself is hardly worth mention. ALongStay (talk) 02:24, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2016 May 18.  —cyberbot I   Talk to my owner :Online 02:41, 18 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. NewYorkActuary (talk) 06:39, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, st170e talk 01:33, 25 May 2016 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: Relisting per a request on my talk page. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 09:22, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NSONGS Mo ainm  ~Talk  15:46, 28 May 2016 (UTC)
 * Delete. Fails WP:NSONGS. Withdrawing my vote, please see my comments below. --Dps04 (talk) 15:53, 29 May 2016 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Malcolmxl5 (talk) 09:22, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * KEEP: I am a bit late to this discussion--I wasn't aware that this article was slated for AFD. I now finally have a chance to mention that this song was included on the 1998 Nuggets box set, which is the most high-profile garage rock compilation of them all, bar none. Generally, any song included on Nuggets is deemed to be "cream of the crop" and once a song has been included on Nuggets it becomes familiar to a large audience and becomes firmly established in the garage rock genre's lexicon. This song is now familiar to most followers of garage rock, and it is a song that is well-regarded.  The liner notes point out its interesting lyrical qualities which concern a factory worker who is dating a rich girl and is afraid to let her know that he is form the working class.  I think that we would do right to keep this article.  The song is also included on the Back from the Grave Vol. LP.  The Back from the Grave Series is one of the best-known as well.  So this song is more high-profile than others as a result of the inclusion on these popular compilations.  Garagepunk66 (talk) 21:10, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * On another note, the user who nominated this article for deletion has also edited as User:ABriefPassing. Both of these editors wrote harassing messages to me in December, while they were trying to delete some of my articles then--they both got blocked (ABreifPassing is indefinitely blocked).  Both of their accounts exist almost excessively for the purpose of harassing me, as the names indicate--if you look at both user names and read the comments on their user pages as well as the comments they put on my user page in December, you will see clearly that their intensions are not good, and to delete this article would embolden them.  I have written up to 140 articles and done a lot of good work here at Wikipedia, so I would ask that my contributions not be taken for granted.  Garagepunk66 (talk) 21:24, 2 June 2016 (UTC)
 * I respectfully ask you to stop trying to get pity for yourself. I told you why I'm here: to nominate non-notable music articles for deletion. I've learned from my past mistake and took some time off to better my stance in conversations. Please stick to valid reasoning in these discussions instead of trying to bring up irrelevant past events to save a non-notable page. You've had some great work but you've also made articles that extend beyond Wikipedia's boundary for notability.ALongStay (talk) 22:14, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * "Respectfully...? I think not. Your comments in the past were anything but respectful, and got you a block.  You were instructed to stay away from me.  I think it is perfectly valid to bring that up here, and, by the way, I had just before mentioned valid reasons for keeping the song.  Using language such as "took some time off to better my stance in conversations" indicates the problem I am alluding to--as if this whole thing is premeditated.  So, please don't be so self-righteous.  You are trying to remove an article about one of the signature songs on Nuggets. Garagepunk66 (talk) 22:27, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

don't talk to me about self-righteousness, I've seem just a taste of your responses to other editors. You treat this like you're making some last stand. I made my reasons why to delete this article and other editors clearly agreed. I'm not going to respond to you anymore unless it is about the song or it is about something civil. Goodbye.ALongStay (talk) 22:52, 2 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I try to be kind and respectful with other editors even when I disagree on points of substance. It is the way that you have spoken to me in the past that has been disrespectful--it got you blocked, if you remember.  I was not notified about the nomination, so I did not have a chance to point out the song's notable points.  I have enumerated the reasons for notability--the other editors did not yet have a chance to hear my rationale when the previous discussion was taking place, so I think that I've done everyone a fair service to express my side. Garagepunk66 (talk) 04:07, 3 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Other things to consider before it is too late: In the words of Richie Unterberger, noted rock writer and critic: "The Brigands' "(Would I Still Be) Her Big Man" was an outstanding and unusual 1966 garage band single." That is how he describes the song in the AllMusic Review.  Need I say more.  Now let's do the right thing and keep the article.  Also: I noticed that one of the editors above who voted to delete, changed his vote from "delete" to "keep" in the post about the Brigands, which pertains directly to the song being discussed in this article.  He is probably un-aware that this particular article has been brought back from deletion and tentatively reinstated.  The editors above, at the top of this page, were not privy to the information I brought to the table, because at the time I had no idea that the article was nominated for delectation--I got no notification, therefore was not present in the discussion.  Is there any way that an administrator can re-contact them, because, if they knew then what they know now, they might have voted differently.  Garagepunk66 (talk) 07:46, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * @Garagepunk66: Thanks for the information above, and let me assure you that I am aware of the on-going discussion here. Apparently, I have changed my stance on the discussion on the article of the band, after I was notified of the inclusion of the band's songs in numerous notable albums. However, with regards to the article of the song itself, I still have some reservations about the subject's notability, especially whether it passes WP:NSONGS or not. In my opinion, this song does not seem to pass any of the three suggested criteria mentioned there. Nevertheless, I'll assume good faith here and withdraw my vote, as I am now reasonably satisfied that the song has some significance and might be notable, even if it might not pass the strict notability guidelines mentioned in WP:NSONGS. Lets see how other users decide. --Dps04 (talk) 17:46, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Also may I remind users to remain civil and assume good faith at all times during deletion discussions. Ad hominem attacks do not facilitate discussion, much less contribute to consensus-building.--Dps04 (talk) 17:52, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * You are right. We'll be better behaved from now on.  Garagepunk66 (talk) 18:17, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge with the Brigands article. The band's article is short as is and needs everything piece of information possible to make it notable. Combine as one, they are clearly a notable subject. But with the info divided as is, I would say the song article does not qualify as notable.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 19:42, 4 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your support of the band's article. Now, as far as the song goes, I do feel that Unterberger's opinion of this song might be rationale to keep the song article in existence too.  He is considered a reputable authority.  I realize that all of this is edging on the thin line, but I think that since we are dealing with a song that is over 50 years old, yet still memorable enough to be included on Nuggets, then maybe we could consider that to be just enough wind to blow the tipping 8-ball into the keep-pocket, and that maybe the best solution is to keep both articles. Garagepunk66 (talk) 06:30, 5 June 2016 (UTC)
 * the reasons I said merge stand as this: All the info in the song article is repeated in the band article, no references are strictly devoted to the song itself, and the song never charted or had any impact on other acts. It definitely is not a stand out track on Nuggets as well. We cannot just keep an article when it fails all guidelines or because it is one we have a personal preference for. If so, I would be shooting out dozens of articles devoted to Music Machine tunes! Now we could save the band article if all efforts were placed into it, but dividing as is may lose both pieces which would be a travesty in my opinion.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 17:59, 5 June 2016 (UTC)


 * It would be better to merge then delete. There is no doubt. Deletion is not a viable option, and should not be considered under any circumstances.  But, if there is a way to keep both articles, then that would be preferable in my mind, in light of Unterberger's opinion that the song is noteworthy.  There are plenty of song articles existing here that fall further the guidelines that are allowed to be kept, which do not have the same degree of historical interest to collectors.  I personally think that it is a standout track, and Unterberger agrees.  That of course is subjective.  Coming from me alone that may not seem convincing, but coming from him, it is the view of a well-known author in a major publication. Keep in mind that there were at least 16, 000 garage rock records released in the US, alone, in the 60s, and out of all of them approximately 100 were chosen to be on that anthology, which is the most high-profile.  But it is now out of our hands.  I trust that the administrators will make a fair decision (i.e. to merge or full-save).  Garagepunk66 (talk) 05:50, 6 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Merge with The Brigands (band). I agree with  - there is nothing in this article that could not be said in the article about the band.  Ghmyrtle (talk) 08:07, 6 June 2016 (UTC)


 * Comment - I would support a merge if accepted one. Makes things a lot easier if the writer goes along with it. Either way, it seems like that will be the course of action.ALongStay (talk) 14:08, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge with The Brigands (band). As the band's notability is primarily based on this song, I see no reason why this requires it's own article. OhNo itsJamie Talk 19:59, 6 June 2016 (UTC)
 * Merge with the Brigands band article. White Arabian Filly  Neigh 21:36, 6 June 2016 (UTC)


 * 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.