Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I'll Never Tire of You


 * 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. Liz Read! Talk! 05:47, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

I'll Never Tire of You

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Subject fails WP:NSONGS. The few citations prove the record existed but I don't think that's enough for GNG. Chris Troutman ( talk ) 13:21, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and History.  Chris Troutman  ( talk ) 13:21, 21 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello !
 * Thank you for your helpful advice! I agree it is bare bones, but it does have some respectable notability. It’s a copyrighted work, was turned into a professional recording by one of the biggest names in the business back in the day and I recently found an article about it that touted it as a big deal song in its day. I just received an email yesterday from the son of Cy Walter. He assured me that he was the one responsible for the creation of the song. I also asked him to share any info he might have about his father and the song so I could reference it! I mentioned that I could help him upload a photo or two of his dad as well! I just uploaded the fair use photo this morning. To me, I feel that is a very big addition to the the song alone! I mean, if a song can make it that far into the limelight, I personally think it is a really big accomplishment! If I would’ve randomly picked a song out of the copyright book that was never turned into a recording, I would definitely agree that it should be deleted. Basically, it should never have been created. Well, that’s about all I can say for now. I am currently looking for more improvements for the page and will continue to do so as much as possible. Considering all of the time I’ve so far spent on it and continue to devote to it, I really do hope the consensus “votes” to let it remain! Thank you! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 17:29, 21 July 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗  plicit  14:18, 28 July 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Femke (talk) 17:58, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Hello !
 * I invite you as well as others to notice the additional info I added since you’re nomination was initiated:
 * I added a Google Books reference from Library of Congress Copyright Entries, I added a Library of Congress photo of the band who recorded the song, I added more info surrounding the other composers of the song, added a Washington Post reference for it, I added the Broadway World article regarding the song being performed on Cy Walter’s centennial celebration...there might be more, but it’s more, nonetheless. I really appreciate you noticing that it was lacking content, because I might not have searched for anymore. I personally believe all Wikipedia articles should be as comprehensive as possible. Editors like yourself do a great job helping and inspiring others to dig deeper! I may add more before next week’s deadline, just depends if I have the time to do so. Thank you! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 00:26, 22 July 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Hello @Explicit
 * Two of the three well-known composers of I’ll Never Tire of You have their own Wikipedia page. After doing my Internet research, I am rather surprised that the third composer, James “Jimmy” Dobson, does not yet have one! He has been a part of Broadway and has appeared in many television and movie roles. With that being mentioned, I am thinking of creating a page about his life and career. With the hope of it being approved and published on Wikipedia, that would then make the history and background of this song all the more notability interesting. It may only take me a few weeks to create Dobson’s page, so I thought of attaching a dummy link to his name to show, in a way, that his page is under construction. The red color, though, sort of gives the impression that there is something wrong. Do you think that would be wise to do so now, or just wait until his article is up and running? I personally feel it looks a little tacky, so I probably won’t do it. Anyway, thanks for extending the deletion discussion. That motivated me to search for more content this past week. I’m currently doing some extensive library research on James Dobson and his association with the song at two Tennessee universities. I, so far, have discovered some revealing facts about his remarkable life and career. Thank you! Have a good day! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 21:45, 3 August 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep Seems like a well-researched article with enough citations to prove notability. I was expecting at most a few lines of text (as most articles for AfD are), but this is rather extensive. Even if the citations aren't directly about the song itself, they do show how the song was used by performers and trace a history of it. Oaktree b (talk) 18:19, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you @Oaktree b for taking the time to read the article and voicing your personal opinion to keep it! I spent a lot of time on it, making sure that it was, in fact, “well-researched!” Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 20:16, 4 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Meets WP:NSONG per Geo Lightspeed's argument. SBKSPP (talk) 03:20, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you @SBKSPP for reading the article and sharing your insight and opinion to keep it! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 11:41, 6 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - passes the NSONGS threshold. — VersaceSpace  🌃 03:44, 7 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you @VersaceSpace for reading it, pointing out that it “passes the NSONGS threshold” and voicing your opinion to “keep” the article! Geo Lightspeed7 (talk) 11:25, 7 August 2022 (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.