Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Goodbye Marie (2nd nomination)


 * 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   keep. Not that I understand the subject, but the guideline for keeping songs seems unambiguous, and sio does the consensus. I considered the arguments at the prior AfD also, & in particular the detailed closing there.  DGG ( talk ) 02:12, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Goodbye Marie
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Permanent stub. As a terribly low-charting song (#17 and #47 for the two versions), it's not been talked about in any way by any reliable sources. The existing sources are mere directory listings: one that does nothing more than verify that Dennis Linde wrote it, and one that does no more than verify that it charted.

The fact that three artists cut it is not enough to pass the music notability guidelines; as it stands, the article is VERY unlikely to grow beyond a stub. But since it doesn't "belong" to just one artist, a merge is out of the question, which leaves us with one option: deletion. The associated artists' articles already say everything that can possibly be said about this song, so deleting it will not sacrifice any info. The only argument presented in the last AFD was that it should be kept only because three artists cut it, with no real policy being cited even after two relists.

Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 01:50, 11 September 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep First off, I frown any time I see a renomination from a previous keep vote...even more so when it's by the same nominator. Secondly, policy was cited in the previous AfD, per WP:NSONGS. As it states, "Songs that have been ranked on national or significant music charts, that have won significant awards or honors or that have been independently released as a recording by several notable artists, bands or groups are probably notable." This song has done two of those things. It was ranked at #17 on the Billboard Country Chart. Later, it was covered in Kenny's #1 ranking album. And even after that, when it was finally released as a single, it ranked yet again at #47. I think that's impressive enough to keep the article. Silver  seren C 17:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. While certainly true that there is not a mountain of scholarly articles about this song, it is completely wrong to suggest it can be covered in the bio articles of the famous people associated with the song.  The point of the article is it shows the bridge between these different artists.  Obviously the Goldsboro article isn't going to say Rogers later covered this song.  It would be deliberately anti-user-friendly to delete such a plainly helpful article like this one, which the NSONGS guideline makes clear.  The song is obviously notable in the colloquial sense. 2005 (talk) 01:11, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:19, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep. The nominator complained that there was no policy discussion in the KEEP decision from the first nomination. That's untrue because there was plenty of discussion there about notability for a charting single. Meanwhile, the nominator has said that the article should be deleted because it will permanently be a stub. WP:NOEFFORT states that an article could be deleted for this reason, but it also states that some stub-class articles can be kept simply because there isn't much else to write about. There is a similar decision to be made at WP:BEFORE criterion #2. Those are two judgment calls that might kill a lot of articles, but this song charted and therefore has some notability under WP:NSONGS and related guidelines. And by the way, the chart guidelines do not contain the phrase "terribly low-charting" as a criterion for making a decision on notability. If you don't think #17 is high enough, explain why. -- D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 14:00, 13 September 2010 (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.