Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lyrics of Boards of Canada


 * 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 of the debate was keep. –  Sceptr e  ( Talk  ) 09:16, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Lyrics of Boards of Canada
This article consists of non-fair use extracts from lyrics and samples, and non-encyclopaedic original research with regards to the meaning. Furthermore, an article just about the lyrics to one band's songs is possibly non-notable. Jdcooper 16:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

*Delete as per nom Jdcooper 16:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC) Would still support delete, but vote for merge to different album articles and redirect to Boards of Canada. Jdcooper 22:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom; listcruft -- T B C [[Image:Confused-tpvgames.gif|18px|]] ???  ???   ??? 16:35, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge with main Boards of Canada article. While I'm personally against excessive fancruft, this particular band has a unique, rabid following and their mysterious personas and hidden/backmasked/elaborate sampling techniques are part of what fuels their popularity.  Perhaps some of the speculation aspects can be toned down, but I don't think the article itself needs to be deleted. -- eo 18:03, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * The entire article is either speculation or of questionable copyright. In what way are Boards of Canada fans (of which I am one) "unique" or notably rabid? If there are any interesting or important factual points contained within here, then they could maybe be put in with the main Boards of Canada article, but this article should not exist. Jdcooper 18:08, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * I definitely understand what you mean. What i was saying was that I have seen, for example, fan websites that are not just about the band itself, but also sites specifically devoted to deciphering their messages.  I love BoC as well, but I don't think I'm too off the mark by saying that someone who takes the time to listen to their music front-and-backwards, isolate samples behind the music, write down every word and research from where it is extracted, and then build/contribute to a website about what it all means is a "rabid fan".  Don't see that kind of thing with too many other artists.  Right?  -- eo 18:24, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * You see that kind of thing with a whole lot of artists, and many far more prominent than BoC, but wikipedia is not the kind of place for any of that stuff, because it is all original research. If you want to mention the lyrics on wikipedia, have what lots of other bands have, simply a link to a lyrics site in the External links section of the main article. Jdcooper 21:21, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Confused These really aren't lyrics for the most part but samples that they have used. Most of the OR is patently obvious and it isn't making much of a analytical claim so I think it is safe under WP:NOR.  It seems like it was spun off of the BoC article for being too long.  kotepho 18:15, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep independently-written information, preferably merged to articles on the albums in question; send this article off to Copyright problems to delete copyvio'd actual lyrics. Samaritan 15:40, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Mwongozi 22:09, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi, what's your rationale for that, out of interest? Jdcooper 22:38, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

''This AfD is being relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that a decision may usefully be reached. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!'' Mailer Diablo 16:30, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Deffinetly Keep it.
 * The article itself's existence is "excessive fancruft", but I will admit that there is probably harvestable information in there to be kept and merged into article for the relevant album. The article itself should probably be redirected to Boards of Canada. I will do all this if/when it gets consensus approved. Jdcooper 17:00, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep v. For great justice. 19:47, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * delete maybe after discreet merging into the album pages. But the reproduction of lyrics in their entirety is generally not fair use (even if they are, ironically, non fair-use samples themselves). &mdash; brighterorange  (talk) 20:07, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Khoikhoi 22:57, 5 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Some anoynmous reader who found this useful. 03:00 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep This is just like a normal band's lyrics. The words distorted and thrown throughout their songs are very cryptic and contriversial (see main BoC page). Merge into album's pages at the least, but I think it should be kept. DarkSideOfTheSpoon 06:19, 8 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep It's a special case. If it is deleted then at least merge to somewhere the origins of the samples for each track, not the lyrics themselves.Kansaikiwi 06:07, 11 April 2006 (UTC)
 * How is it a special case? What does that mean? Jdcooper 09:14, 11 April 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.