Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of popular songs based on classical music


 * 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 and add references as a matter of urgency. This article is in a very poor state. As the proposer said it's had a unreferenced on it since last December, yet lacks one single reference for any of its items.

In particular, I suggest that all references to Pachelbelle's Canon and Gigue in D Major should be removed at once and each should only be restored if and when adequate references are available for an individual case.

Nevertheless there is no consensus to delete, and a number of editors find merit in the idea of such a list. However at a future deletion discussion, which I suggest might be appropriate in January when the tag will have been on the article for over twelve months, I suggest that further absence of references should be taken as strong evidence that this article will not be improved. Unverifiable material has no place on Wikipedia, even when a discussion gives the appearance of consensus that it should remain. --Tony Sidaway 20:52, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

List of popular songs based on classical music

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Besides the oft-cited "Wikipedia is not repository of loosely associated items", the list makes a lot of assumptions - especially with the amount of Pachelbel's Canon that's there. Ironically, Rob Paravonian made a brilliant case to the amount of OR is in this in his Pachelbel rant by saying that "all songs use the same damn chords". This isn't a secret that the article's bad, as it's had the unreferenced tag for ten months and concerns have been raised with the amount of willy-nilly Pachelbel additions just because it uses the same chords as the Canon. I think the list would do better as a category with more stringent criteria - for example, songs which are irrefutably based on classical music (e.g. "A Fifth of Beethoven") instead of borrowing a few chords. Will (talk) 16:25, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Trim not Delete I definetly agree that there's way too many that are just 'similar'. If it's trimmed down to those that make direct use the pieces, it's a worthwhile article, simply because a song is often notable for being based off something else. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 17:53, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. OR, trivia, weird topic anyway. Will hardly be missed. K. Lásztocska 19:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Actually I'd miss it. I've actually linked to it more than once in response to people asking about the exact topic of pop music based on classical. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 19:43, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Potentially useful list which needs improving and referencing. Clear inclusion criteria can be developed that would exclude the ones that just reuse chord sequences. Espresso Addict 17:34, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep useful and intriguing list, has its faults but there is nothing that trimming and expanding where needed can't fix. KTo288 00:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Remove anything unsourced. Delete if not improved soon.  Torc2 05:54, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Interesting list, even in its current state. It does need lots of work. &mdash; SvdB 23:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT. Doctorfluffy 17:29, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Which of those applies here? Not #1, as they certainly are associated, all being songs, and all being based on classical music. #2, #3, and #4 aren't even in the same ballpark. #5 MIGHT apply, if you can argue that there's nothing encyclopedic about this catagorization of songs. Can you? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ 18:10, 2 November 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.