Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jack Sparrow (song)

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The result was Withdrawn At the time of nomination only two sources were available from WP:RS. Since nomination it has hit the chart and avaiblible sourcing has exploded. No sense in wasting people's time here keeping it open The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 19:22, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jack Sparrow (song)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 01:19, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy Keep Per WP:SNOW. Nimuaq (talk) 02:09, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. ~~I won't call it a snow day yet, but~~ LA Times and Entertainment Weekly are already sourced and certainly reliable enough. The EW reference itself has some background information that could be added to the article. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:06, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Two sources is not WP:SIGCOV nor is there enough verifiable material to create a reasonably detailed article The Resident Anthropologist (talk)•(contribs) 13:35, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I better get my touque. A snowstorm seems to be brewing. Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:20, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

- - (ec)Well, we could use this, or maybe Salon.com... Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:56, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - IMHO it's already detailed enough according to WP:NSONG, ie. beyond stub. Agent L (talk) 16:03, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
perhaps merge? to Turtleneck & Chain--Scott Mac 15:07, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Michael Bolton is quite notable. Also: material is relatively new, so it's too soon to judge notability. Agent L (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that Bolton is notable is rather covered by keeping this article. As for "too soon to judge" - if notability isn't established now, we don't guess about future notability - we act on the current facts and revise later if that changes.--Scott Mac 15:58, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — • Gene93k (talk) 22:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Note to nom: Can you be specific on how this fails WP:NSONG? Just pointing out a policy and stating it fails it does not justify a reason for deletion. See WP:JUSTA. –Dream out loud (talk) 22:30, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep If the nom's reason for deletion is due to lack of sources, then take a look at 3 more sources I just found with a simple Google search. If a comedy song being mentioned by The Wall Street Journal isn't enough to establish notability, I don't know what is.

http://www.okmagazine.com/2011/05/watch-michael-bolton-the-lonely-islands-jack-sparrow-digital-short-on-snl/

http://blogs.wsj.com/speakeasy/2011/05/10/how-the-lonely-island-guys-landed-michael-bolton-for-jack-sparrow/

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/michael-bolton-snl-sketch-one-186625

–Dream out loud (talk) 22:44, 21 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can argue with what's in the article, no need to post links no one will check out. Hekerui (talk) 10:17, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep charted in the Billboard Hot 100 since it was nominated. Hekerui (talk) 10:17, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The song has charted in four different major music charts (the Billboard Hot 100, Canada Hot 100, Sweden Singles Chart; [1]; and the UK Singles Chart [2]. That's enough to call it notable, personally. Holiday56 (talk) 13:41, 22 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.