Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sommernatt ved fjorden


 * 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   keep. (non-admin closure) Biblio  worm  01:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Sommernatt ved fjorden

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no explanation why this song is notable. There are no reliable sources that discuss the song. Vanjagenije (talk) 16:27, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Keep I understand the nomination since there was no references, but the song is well-known and often played in Norway; I have added one reference about this. Iselilja (talk) 16:41, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * I do not see any sources in the English article which establish notability, and Norwegian Wikipedia has no sources at all. However, Norwegian Wikipedia lists plenty of recordings of the song. If there are so many recordings of it, there may be reason to believe that the song is notable, although the article currently is badly referenced. --Stefan2 (talk) 17:12, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * The source I added was from the ordinary encyclopedia in Norway: Store norske leksikon. They don't have an article about the song specifically (normal encyclopedia seldom has such entries), but in an article on Ketil Bjørnstad they call the triple album Leve Patagonia! for pioneering, a musical epic and a milestone in Norwegian popular music. This particular song is described as a romantic pearl which is part of Norwegian song treasure; often played on radio and by bar pianists. Basically they describe it as an evergreen. And as you can see on NOWP it is recorded by a variety of artists. Iselilja (talk) 17:25, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  Everymorning   talk to me  17:40, 3 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Keep - when nomination was added this was a deletion worthy article. Now wth Iseliljas improvements it is not.--BabbaQ (talk) 18:41, 3 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Norway-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 16:07, 4 December 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 01:08, 11 December 2014 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Spirit of Eagle (talk) 01:16, 18 December 2014 (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.