Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/59 Chrystie Street


 * 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   merge all to B-Boy Bouillabaisse. -Scottywong | prattle _ 16:33, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

59 Chrystie Street

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Individual sections of a song that does not on its own rise to notability for independent articles for each section. I am also nominating the following related pages:
 * -- KTC (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * -- KTC (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * -- KTC (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * -- KTC (talk) 14:53, 4 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 16:10, 4 June 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment. Paul's Boutique is a very important and influential hip-hop record, heavily discussed, and there actually are sources for at least some of the content in these subarticles.  While I'm sympathetic to the notion that we don't need a separate article for each section of a track, rather than deletion perhaps it would be better to merge all of these back into the article for B-Boy Bouillabaisse, which could collect the significant and sourced material into one article? --Arxiloxos (talk) 00:50, 5 June 2012 (UTC)


 * MERGE So-called "importance" of a hip-hop (or any other) song is not sufficient for keeping it as a separate article. I would suggest merging the appropriate content into the main B-Boy Bouillabaisse article for the record.  Vertium (talk) 02:44, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge all of the articles listed in this AfD to B-Boy Bouillabaisse as suggested. The song is notable but that song's article is the obvious and convenient place to discuss each section. -- D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 19:54, 6 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Merge all to B-Boy Bouillabaisse. Whether or not the individual components are notable enough to support independent entries, it's more convenient for the reader to have them in a single article. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 23:06, 9 June 2012 (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.