Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Want You (Madonna song)


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was no consensus - defaulting to keep --Cel e stianpower hablamé 14:40, 22 October 2005 (UTC)

I Want You (Madonna song)
Yet another article on a non-notable cover of a song by a pop singer, filled with POV and biased language (this one blaringly so) that could, as they should all be, reduced to one or two objectively written sentences and merged to a proper album. FuriousFreddy 21:13, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, notable collaboration with Massive Attack. Production, remixes, charts, airplay and reactions are all valid information and specific to this version. Kappa 23:43, 16 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Merge to I Want You. The original version was done by Marvin Gaye. This version appeared on a tribute album to him. The Madonna version is part of the history of the song and his version is better known than hers. Capitalistroadster 01:32, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Re-direct to I Want You as it has now been revised covering both the Marvin Gaye and Madonna version. I Want You should be moved to I Want You (song) while I Want You should be a disambiguation covering both the song and album. Capitalistroadster 10:26, 17 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unlikely search. Jkelly 02:22, 18 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per Jkelly. Dystopos 02:07, 19 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Everyking 12:45, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Redirect per Capitalistroadster. If there are boxes, templates etc in other Madonna articles, they will want this redirect so that those things still work. (I know they could change the wiki-markup, but that may end up being a large and tedious job, and redirects are cheap.) However, this version really doesn't need a page of its own. --Jacquelyn Marie 18:56, 20 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep --Musicpvm 03:14, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * ¿Por que? --FuriousFreddy 03:50, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep because it has all the essential information for a single article, it is well written and well structured and has too much information to be merged with any other article as there are several points to expand on further. Ultimate Star Wars Freak 09:48, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Agreed with Kappa and Ultimate Star Wars Freak OmegaWikipedia 12:19, 22 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a notable article, and deserves to remain on Wikipedia. --Winnermario 13:36, 22 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.