Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of answer songs


 * 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 Delete &mdash; Caknuck 03:48, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

List of answer songs

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Loosely associated items, unsourced, can be seen as a hip-hop feud documentation Will (talk) 13:29, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as unsourced original research. Propaniac 15:56, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as OR. Bart133 (t) (c) 16:22, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak delete Some of this... some... can be merged back into Answer song. However, there aren't that many cases where both the statement and the response are well-known (i.e. blue-links), then nobody's paying attention to the "conversation".  Classic example is Sweet Home Alabama as an answer to Southern Man.  Joel Whitburn pointed out a handful of cases where an answer song made the Top 40 along with the original.  Not really enough famous examples to be more than a section of an article. Mandsford 23:57, 3 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete, WP:NOT a directory of loosely associated topics. Very trivial connection between the songs. Crazysuit 01:50, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge back to "answer song". The "further reading" section gives a clue as to how one could adress the OR concerns and "loosely associated" is an ill-defined term being arbitrarily applied. -MrFizyx 20:33, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a list of trivial information (WP:5) Corpx 20:13, 6 August 2007 (UTC)
 * One can call anything one doesn't care about trivia. One does however find examples when one searches for "answer songs" in books, and  scholarly writings (OK, you need to filter out the "question-and-answer-songs").  Are there sources available to demonstrate notability and provide a basis for this article?  We shouldn't destroy content just because a few people have no use for it. -MrFizyx 21:46, 6 August 2007 (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.