Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/My Funny Valentine

 This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record. The result of the debate was keep. Kelly Martin 20:24, Jun 20, 2005 (UTC)

My Funny Valentine
These lyrics should not be there... Florilegist 02:42, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) titled "My Funny Valentine" most of which relate to this song. BTW, there is a Miles Davis live album of the same name which is considered by some to be one of the best versions of standards ever recorded. See Capitalistroadster 08:02, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC) Apparently, Chet Baker had a big hit with it in the 1950's and the song was sung in Pal Joey by Kim Novak. I might have at expanding this myself.Capitalistroadster 08:10, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Check for copyvio. Mr Bound 02:45, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: First, copyrighted material. Second, incomplete, so no transwiki to source, even if the lyrics were free. Geogre 02:59, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand: It is one of the landmark songs, as it has been a bravura piece by crooners since its writing. I'm in favor of articles on very few and extremely important popular songs, and this qualifies, but we ought to discuss it as a landmark. Geogre 12:17, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * I've put in a legit stub. It may be okay now. --Arcadian 03:50, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Arcadian's stub. RickK 04:42, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep new stub, but it really should be expanded; if we are going to have articles on songs they should have some real substance, not just a short list of facts. Also, the potential copyvio in the history could be a problem if this isn't in the public domain. -R. fiend 05:04, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree with R. fiend that an article on a song should typically be more than a short list of facts, but I think there is certainly a legitmate interest in some songs (like this) that have a history beyond a single artist or medium.  In some cases there may not be more than a few facts, or at least a few important facts.  For example, if this particular song was performed by six other artists but their versions were never popular, I don't see that we add value here by mentioning the appropriately forgotten versions. DS1953 05:33, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Jamyskis 07:29, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep and expand. Notable song with Allmusic.com stating that there are nearly 1300 versions of a song
 * Strong Keep I'm in favour of keeping most songs, and one as famous as this definitely needs an article. Andrew Lenahan - St ar bli nd 09:40, Jun 13, 2005 (UTC)
 * I fleshed it out a little more, using Capitalistroadster's posting as a starting point. Question: is it copyvio to include the chords? I added those in because they're so familiar to jazz musicians. I think that including the chords is fair use, but I could also see the other side of the argument, and wouldn't object if they were removed. --Arcadian 12:08, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * It is definitely not a copyright violation to include the chords the way you have done. Copyright only covers the author's actual expression.  For example, to quote a passage from a book you would need to rely on "fair use" because you are using the author's own words.  If you briefly summarize the author's book in your own words, that simply does not violate his copyright.  There are obviously areas in between, but your listing of the chords clearly is not even in the grey area. DS1953 14:13, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Cool -- thanks. --Arcadian 01:57, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep. I can see some curious individual wondering what "my funny valentine" means or is a reference to; it sorta sounds like a common expression. --Robojames 18:20, 13 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. An important song from the period of unpopular music.  FWIW, at least some brief quotation of the lyrics, perhaps illustrating the use of the title in the song, would certainly be fair use.  Smerdis of Tlön 19:30, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep revised version. --FuriousFreddy 19:40, 14 Jun 2005 (UTC)
 * ''This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages.