Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mary Don't You Weep


 * 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   Snow Keep. Non-admin closure. Joe Chill (talk) 19:47, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Mary Don&

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Notability Spectre9 (talk) 05:24, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Question In what ways does it lack notability? Crafty (talk) 05:29, 4 August 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong keep. Dave Marsh calls this "One of the most important Negro spirituals".  Dozens of recordings of it have been made, across the gamut of American music genres.  There are plenty of books that discuss or mention the song.  Yes, the article should have inline citations and it doesn't, yes the article should expand more upon the song's significance than it does, yes the article should discuss how this was The Swan Silvertones' biggest hit and inspired the writing of "Bridge Over Troubled Water".  But improvement not deletion is the answer to these shortcomings.  Wasted Time R (talk) 11:27, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - what he said. Crafty (talk) 11:37, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep obviously: this is like trying to delete "Amazing Grace". A glance at google or google books will show you vast numbers of references and many famous singers from folk/blues etc. N p holmes (talk) 14:36, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep with snow. This kind of nomination really ticks me off. If Spectre9 could have spent just a half a minute more on this nomination, by typing in the title in Google Books, they would have immediately found the many references that exist, two of which I just added to the article. But then, all they could manage to note was "notability." Well, notability plenty, and plenty of troutslap also. Drmies (talk) 18:44, 4 August 2009 (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.