Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Star of the County Down

Old discussion from VfD
Discussion concluded and article kept on June 2, 2004

Star of the County Down
Nothing but lyrics. Unless there's a discussion of the significance of the song, why keep it? RickK 02:33, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. You might want to read the article, which contains more than lyrics, and the deletion discussion resulting from its listing on 14 May, which you cut short by using a speedy delete on 14 May with the claim that this old Irish ballad was copyvio, contrary to our speedy delete, deletion and copyvio policies. After a brief discussion, the original lister changed their mind and said keep. Jamesday 02:56, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Right, this is that page, it was moved, deleted, undeleted, un-VfD'd, and now RickK is re-VfDing it. Perhaps it could be more of a page, but right now it doesn't really contain any more than lyrics. Is Wikipedia a database of lyrics? If not, as I suspect, my current vote would be to delete or transwiki to a more appropriate place. I expect the page will go through the "Speedy Cleanup" process of many VfD'd pages, though, so my vote may change. --Ben Brockert 03:13, May 26, 2004 (UTC)
 * Yes, I expect it'll be cleaned up. Short lyrics are fine so far as I'm concerned, for things like this, since we also don't want to frustrate people. Could do with more coverage of its history and repeated use in lots of other works over the years, of course. Not really a topic which interests me but I doubt we'll have a shortage of those interested in well known Irish ballads to work on it. :) Jamesday 03:45, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Is there any precedent for keeping lyrics? This song's lyrics are so prevalent on the Web, I'm not sure we need to repeat them. Anyway, my position is basically the same as on 5/14; Info about the song is plenty worthy of inclusion (more's been added already). I'd replace the lyrics with a stub notice and let nature take its course. (And not put it on cleanup--during New Pages patrol today I've left several articles much shorter as plain stubs--there's already so many needier articles on Cleanup.) Niteowlneils 04:01, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Note: The lyrics in the article may only be short because they appear to be incomplete . Niteowlneils 04:08, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Even if the lyrics were to be cut, there's a nice stub here about an important (And lyrically interesting) folk song. Snowspinner 07:14, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I say we keep the article, but only the "article" part. If the lyrics are so prevalent on the web, then the article can just link to them.  blankfaze | &#9835 18:06, 26 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep including lyrics. RossA 02:56, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Well known song, lyrics should be kept also as they ar annotated. Nikola 09:07, 27 May 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep. Interesting song with a relevant history. And I'd like to vote that  if  a song is encyclopedic and worthy of keeping, we should keep the full lyrics at the bottom of the article.  Wikipedia is not paper.  Rossami 19:14, 28 May 2004 (UTC)
 * I'd like to temper this with a note that lyrics archives have historically gotten into some trouble on copyright grounds, and that we should only post complete lyrics in cases where the songs are in the public domain, or released under an appropriate license. Snowspinner 21:05, May 31, 2004 (UTC)
 * Keep the page and the lyrics. The blurb provides an interesting and informative introduction to a popular song. The entire point of the blurb and the page is for the song. Without the lyrics, this is essentially pointless, IMHO. --Mud 23:32, 31 May 2004 (UTC)