Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rock songs plaigarized from other rock songs

 This page is an archive of the proposed deletion of the article below. Further comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or on a Votes for Undeletion nomination). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the debate was DELETE. &mdash; J I P | Talk 17:17, 29 September 2005 (UTC)

Rock songs plaigarized from other rock songs
Offers no proof, not NPOV. Its useless, pointless nonsense Jack Cain
 * Comment: this needs to be renamed, cleaned up, and end up as something like Famous plagiarism cases in popular music, where the bright-line criterion for inclusion is a court ruling. -- MCB 04:23, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete: It's hard to take an article seriously when the main word is consistently misspelled. In any case, unless the claims are substantiated, accusations of plagiarism are slanderous. Stating in a public forum that someone is a thief isn't a good idea. If the article is kept, it should be reworded, as MCB said. &mdash; Cory Maylett 04:43, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Rename and do what MCB says. --Apyule 06:41, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete unless I can see some court cases or confessions on the part of the "guilty" party. Since songs are copyrighted, plagiarism is illegal and should have led to a legal process. If it didn't, the "victim" probably couldn't prove it himself, making it highly dubious as "fact". Usrnme h8er 08:27, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. A court did find that George Harrison's "My Sweet Lord" plagiarised "He's So Fine" by The Chiffons, but I'm not convinced that either song counts as "rock". I couldn't comment about the other songs named, but successful plagiarism cases concerning popular music are surprisingly rare... it seems doubtful that there's much potential for a worthwhile article on the subject. In any case, this piece, for all the reasons above, would not be a strong basis for such an article. TheMadBaron 11:16, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Conditional Delete - I support the idea set forth by MCB, but at this point there is nothing of value in this article that could be built upon. I can see some value in the subject matter though and my opinion is that it would be better to write up a Famous plagiarism cases in popular music article from scratch.  There are several cases not mentioned here (like Led Zeppelin's Lemon Song) where songwriting credits were belatedly granted.  A decent article could be written if someone wants to take the time to do some research--Isotope23 14:14, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete agree with Isotope23. &mdash;Wahoofive (talk) 16:21, 21 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. First, because of the word "rock" in the title. People will just add other sorts of songs and then fight over whether it's rock or not, rather than on the evidence of plagiarism. Second, because it is doubly specific in that sense &mdash; what if a rock song is taken from another non-rock song? Third, because this kind of information does not stand usefully alone: mention the fact in the subjects' articles where it will have context rather than extracting random bits of information into yetanotherlist. Better, write a proper article on plagiarism in popular music, and put some effort into talking about the questions that were/are raised, the progress of the court cases, the implications of law and jurisdictions, and digital rights management. Lists when there could be articles are excuses for not doing the encyclopedic job thoroughly. -Splash talk 22:53, 21 September 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.