Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about World War II


 * 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 'just closed. The article has been renamed Role of music in World War II, and bears little or no resemblance to what was originally AFD's. That was probably a good idea. Proto :: type  10:44, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

List of songs about World War II
Listcruft with no discernible encyclopedic value. cholmes75 (chit chat) 15:35, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * What is "Listcruft?" No article in Wikipedia, no definition in the associated dictionary. Might as well say "fnorkthart" as the reason for deletion.Edison 03:53, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep &mdash; Music performed during major wars has some cultural and sentimental value, particularly to those who lived through the period. I think this particular list is interesting and encyclopedic. &mdash; RJH (talk) 16:03, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Question - What particularly do you find interesting and encyclopedic about it? --cholmes75 (chit chat) 16:10, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Question -Do you really need such a Vanity page on your profile? If Wikipedia has room for you blogs, hobbies, interests and some of your photos it has room for a list of the music men and women listened to in the largest war in human history, or maybe not.  --Rhooker1236 16:20, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - I fail to see what my user page has to do with this. And in any case, it's not about whether or not Wikipedia has room for a list like this, but rather whether or not it belongs in the first place. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 20:52, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Question -What particularly do you find about this place that makes it the wrong space to question the relative uses and abuses of Wikipedia? What makes this place the wrong place, and what makes your Vanity page Encyclopedic.  If Wikipedia is going to delete this wonderful article because you demand a definition of encyclopedic well I have never seen an encyclopedia with administrators give each other metals, have links to their blogs, or post pictures of some houses they like.  What makes you fit to judge the encyclopedic nature of a article when you abuse these values yourself.  The article is excellent and should stay.  To delete it would be an insult to the people who lived through that time.  Especially since my wife just point out the idiotic Pamela Anderson article.  This thing is becoming a joke.  Also do you put your Wikipedia medals on when you go shopping?--Rhooker1236 10:51, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I suppose it's partly because I grew up with people who had strong memories of the war, and the music of that time. Just as I have powerful memories associated with the music during the Vietnam War. So it's interesting to read about the music of the period and reflect on that time in history. Mayhap it's just a silly sentimentality. :-) &mdash; RJH (talk) 18:16, 22 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Preserving the cultural experience of the most dramatic event of modern history is not sentimentality, it is humanity. Your sane, the one's who want to delete this have simply gone nuts with the role playing game Wikipedia has become.  Anyone who knows anything about WWII understands the critical role music played and would appreciate this article.  In fact this is the only article in Wikipedia that my father in law, a vet from the South Pacific, found interesting.  But I guess we need to make room for more shots of Pamela Anderson, fan comments on Star Trek:Enterprise, more comments on Klingon Language, to date one small child might speak natively in 10 years, and the Star Wars movies. I guess Andrew Orlowski was right after all.--Rhooker1236 10:55, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Another Question "Another Brick in the Wall"? How were these determined? Fan-1967 16:11, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Another Question You seem able to write a lot of reason to delete, why not edit that one out of the article, even though there are songs about WWII in the Wall and Final Cut, but I have added better ones.--Rhooker1236 14:25, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep I would imagine that over the years such a page could contain a full list of the popular music of WWII, and would be an invaluage living reference for historians and artists looking at that period. It is Wikipedic because it strives to expand the overall knowledge construction, because Wikipedia is one of the few places where such knowledge can be held, and that over time it will grow to become a hub connectiong to information, say details and lyrics of the songs, references to the songs role in history (i.e. Favority with Americans in South Pacific).  Excellent article and the very fact its up for deletion, and that someone has been asked to define encyclopedic to try and save it is rather sad.  --Rhooker1236 16:15, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, as it would probably be better off as a category, and as with all "List of [x] about [x] articles" the difficultiy in drawing boundries severly undermines it's usefullness. A list of significant songs about WWII, or songs from WWII might be usefull but would have similar problems. Artw 16:40, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Songs about WWII are almost a genre unto themselves. I see no problem with it, however I agree with Fan-1967 that some of the entries are questionable and should be vetted. 23skidoo 17:44, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment Many of the songs are from that era, and took on meaning relevant to the war, but are not specifically about the war, and don't even mention it in any way. Some were written much earlier. Fan-1967 18:02, 21 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - cat would be better, seeing as there is no additional information provided in the article which would substantiate a list -- MrDolomite | Talk 17:53, 21 July 2006 (UTC) moving comment down below, now that article has been revised. &mdash; MrDolomite | Talk 12:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete This is what categories are for. How much of the song has to refer to WWII to be on this list? There is no article on songs about World War II (nor is there a need for one), so this list is not necessary. It is not encyclopedic and is listcruft. No need to open the door to lists of songs about WWI, the Vietnam War, the cola wars, or whatever. Agent 86 20:49, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. The lack of criteria has already led to confusion about what can and can't go on the list (are we talking about "songs about the war" or "songs which were popular during the war"? Both appear to be listed and one of the rationales to keep above is also conflating the two together. Further, I'm not entirely convinced that everything on the list qualifies under either criterion). BigHaz 23:18, 21 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Clear Case of Category. -- GWO
 * Keep mergist analysis seems to apply here. The problem with using a category is that it requires a separate article for each song.  That is more WP:CRUFT-y than a single-article list, almost by definition.  The list can mention songs that are verifiable but don't rise to the level of needing their own articles.  Using a category would result in a bunch of song articles being made all the time that are basically content-free.Phr (talk) 09:48, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete I don't completely object to the topic of this list, but this particular list is not worth keeping around. What are the criteria? For example, how is "I'll Get By (As Long As I Have You)" about World War II? As the entries on the list belie the idea that there's a clear topic, this is rendered useless. GassyGuy 10:57, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Is it that admins are voting on this without knowing anything about WWII culture, or not caring, or they just love to delete?
 * There seems to be a clear failure on the part of many of the admins on this group to understand cultural studies and history, but sadly it does not stop the march to delete, which is now the admins favorite past time. Just an effort to make clear.  WWII was a radio war, the first and only radio war.  For most people the only connection they had to the mass media of that day was through radio, and radio generally plays a lot of music.  Song were about the war itself, or about the strong emotional feelings that the war took place, or just pretty songs that people in the war felt.  Some songs were big band songs without words, but were popular with the troops. But espeically for the American forces songs defined a time, a cause, a connection to home, a wall against fear, and a positive outlook which got the nation through.  If you want to know whay the US won WWII and lost Vietnam and the Second Iraq War probably the place to look are the songs, WWII songs speak of motivation, hope, aspiration, unity; a sense of political purpose lacking in recent wars and significant. This type of page is one of the most significant types of entries that Wikipedia could have that a book can not, as more and more songs and composers, in theory, are added and not deleted (highly unlikely) this list of significant songs that define a period would grow.  If there is a need to more clearly defined that types of music that goes in this list than that is NOT best done with a delete.  In fact this list is probably a defining moment for Wikipedia.  It is the kind of network information that a Wiki is best at capturing, in fact the only reason to have a wiki is to be able to produce these kinds of centre points.  If Wikipedia can't keep a critical contribution to knowledge construction like this, while still having a massive Pamela Anderson article, a huge page on Jorn Barger who runs a blogs and is an anti-semite, and masses on the Klingon language, than it is clearly and "objectively" dead as a form of human knowledge collection.  This article holds the entire soul of Wikipedia.  Wikipedia could have been the only place to collect this historically critical information, and it looks to be deleted.  Its sad to because a number of us would clearly like to make the case for why this is critical on the page, but one the Wiki admins get the smell of a delete they won't stop.  I'm sure this article will be deleted and it will be a truely pathetic day for Wikipedia.  Of course Jimbo "Ayn Rand contains all truth" Jones many enemies will be delighted, as will Britanica and Google and Microsoft, knowing they have little to fear from an "encyclopedia" which can't even understand how important mustic was to WWII. --Rhooker1236 10:46, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. The above poster's arguments (once cleansed of their vitriol) notwithstanding, this article is ill-suited to document the role of music in WWII.  Want an article about that?  Make Role of music in WWII or something similar.  That would be verifiable and encyclopediac.  This is inviting a list that is open ended, unverifiable, an inherently tainted by POV arguments over what is "about enough" to be included. (As of 7/31, this has been done in all but name) Serpent&#39;s Choice 11:00, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * WRONG An article called "The Role of Music in WWII" would be open to NOPV since there exists no semiotic or cultural study theory at this time as to what the role of music is? What is the role of Rock Music, of Jazz, of Kabuki? Such an article would be by its nature rather opionated and more on the level of theory rather then encyclopedic.  An article outline the most popular songs from the war and about the war CAN be verified, the role of music in the war can not.  I don't mean to be vitriol but that does not make sense at all.  A list of songs is easier to approve as being from a time or of a content than a discourse on the function of that music.  Its sometimes like you admins aren't think in your hungry to delete articles. --Rhooker1236 14:30, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment - But the article, as you have recently edited it, has in fact become an original research topic on the role of music in WWII. --cholmes75 (chit chat) 14:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment I'm moved by Rhooker1236's remarks (I already voted keep though). I think Serpent's Choice suggestion of an article about the role of music in WW2 is also a good idea, but I'm still fine with the list for reasons stated earlier.  Issues of verifiability can be handled the usual way--anyone wanting to challenge an entry can ask for a cite (but don't do that maliciously, WP:AGF and challenge in cases where there's actual doubt).  Replacing the list with a category does absolutely nothing to get rid of such doubts--instead of "why is this song on the list" it becomes "why is this song in the category".  Phr (talk) 11:16, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * My problem regarding this topic really is in its titling. Rhooker1236 wants this entry to bring together "songs that define a period".  And I will not argue; WWII is perhaps unique among major wars in that music, at home and abroad, played an important role in morale and even propoganda.  The use of music in the period is verifiable.  It is notable.  It is encyclopediac.  But that's not what this list is titled as, and so that's not what it would contain.  Rhooker1236 writes how "[s]ong[s] were about the war itself, or about the strong emotional feelings that the war took place, or just pretty songs that people in the war felt."  But a pretty song that was a morale motivator for soldiers or their families homeside is not, strictly speaking, a "song about World War II".  Such songs should be pulled from this list.  Any song written before WWII could not be about the war, and should be pulled from this list.  And what about songs written 10, 20, 30 years after the war?  How can we decide whether those songs are "about" the war?  For many bands and many songs, meaning is left to the audience.  For us as editors to determine which songs are meant to invoke the memory of WWII to an extent worthy of making this list is fundamentally incompatible with WP:NPOV (Another Brick in the Wall??).  For what its worth, Rhooker, I'm on your side.  What you are talking about is something that Wikipedia needs (and that, so far as I can tell, Wikipedia doesn't currently have).  But this list is not going to produce the end you're looking for.  Let this one go, and make a more appropriate home for the knowledge.  It deserves better. Serpent&#39;s Choice 11:41, 24 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Firstly it is not up to you to decide what should be in the songs, let some people who lived through the period ad.
 * The article may have a poor name, but it redirects from "songs from WWII" so it is Songs about and Songs from WWII.
 * I have just spent 3 hours of my employers time to fill it out to a proper stub, but I have not touched the surface. My research indicates that the differences between the music of different regims, and the way WWII has been expressed after the is fascinating.
 * I hope to spent a few more weeks researching and expanding this article and giving it better links, please don't delete it, I am desperate here. I feel that Wikipedia's very soul is on the line here.  This is the kind of article only something like Wikipedia can make, it does not hurt ANYONE that it is here and I KNOW that in time it can be a great article.  If you delete it I really have to wonder about Jimbo's entire play thing.
 * And though my handle is rhooker123, to prevent spamming, my name is Robert Hooker, I live in London and am 39 years old and a buff about popular culture and World War II. I take ownership for the value of the knowledge constructed here and ask that a summary deletion not be carried out and that those of us who love the idea of this article be given a chance to make something great out of it.--Rhooker1236 14:23, 24 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Comment Article is now radically different (expanded) compared to the first few days of this AfD. Participants who proposed deletion early in the discussion should check the new version.  Partipants who proposed deletion early based on the old version and then didn't participate further should be downweighted for consensus purposes since they weren't referring to the same article.  However, as someone said above, the new version should maybe have a different title.   I don't see it as OR beyond other culture-related articles; it could use better sourcing, but it's still a work in progress.  I think it's a promising article now.Phr (talk) 14:40, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


 * References and sources I have taken references for the work, but I have a full time job and I am in the process of changing jobs right now, so I can only do work in patches. If I am going to fill this out it will take a couple of weeks, if it is just going to be deleted I would like to know now so I don't waste any more time on it.  The vote seems to be against it, but how decisions are made is never clear. -- —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Rhooker1236 (talk • contribs).
 * Delete after reviewing the updated content of the article (thanks for the note Phr), this is still a good use of a category. The non-list content of this article should be moved to a new article Role of music in WWII per Serpent's Choice above. &mdash; MrDolomite | Talk 12:52, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment The article is no longer a list at all, and at this point the article should simply be moved to a new title, since it's an entirely different article now. Issues of whether the article should then contain a list of songs are editorial questions belonging on the article's discussion page, not an afd (unless someone opens a separate afd for the new article).  Unless someone objects (or does it first) I'm going to rename it to "Role of music in World War II".  Also, kudos to Rhooker1236 for his work on this promising new article. Phr (talk) 20:56, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep This is a great article for those of us whose parents fought in the war, or whose parents lost someone in the war. It can be improved. There were lots of articles about the music of the war. Broadcasts and records were so crucial to the war effort that vinyl Vdiscs of songs were created and shipped to the troops even while the musicians union was on strike and commercial recordings were not being made. Lots of emotion invested in some couple's special song. Edison 01:30, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep (but retitle). I have rescinded my previous deletion endorsement in light of the current state of the article.  It will need to be renamed; it no longer remotely meets the description of a list as Wikipedia knows them.  Although edits to entries in AfD are permissible (and have likely saved this content), I am reticent to be bold enough to pagemove this during AfD, given its evolution during the process.  Also the page will require substantially better sourcing in the near-term regardless of destination titling, but because the content can be verified, that is a matter for the page's talk and no longer for AfD. Serpent&#39;s Choice 02:24, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Article is renamed Per earlier comment, since no one objected I've moved the article to Role of music in World War II. I left the AfD template in it but I think this AfD should be closed and the template removed.  The article that was AfD'd and the present article have no resemblance to each other.  Anyone still favoring deletion should open a new AfD.  Discussion about the article content should go on the article talk page, not here.  It's massively stressful to an article writer to have to make edits while an AfD is winding down. Phr (talk) 04:08, 31 July 2006 (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.