Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/300 Bars and Runnin'
- 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 delete. Cirt (talk) 18:17, 4 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- 300 Bars and Runnin' (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
![]() | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:spa|username}} ; suspected canvassed users: {{subst:canvassed|username}} ; accounts blocked for sockpuppetry: {{subst:csm|username}} or {{subst:csp|username}} . |
Delete. A non-charting song that fails WP:NSONGS. No reliable sources to prove notability.I can see an influx of angry fans on the horizon, so I'd like to remind the closing admin that this is a discussion, not a majority vote. Dale 11:18, 25 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I didn't think that we used that template as a preventative. Admins can usually sort out the improper !votes without too much trouble.
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:30, 2 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, Dalejenkins, if I were you, I would refrain from using that template until there are SPAs showing up in significant numbers. I'd also refrain from "reminding the closing admin" of the blindingly obvious, and if you absolutely have to, don't use bold type. Assuming bad faith on the part of debate participants is also not a very good idea. In fact, just state your case briefly and neutrally and leave it at that.
Delete because I can't find enough sources to justify an article, I can't see an appropriate merge target and I can't see any value in a redirect.—S Marshall Talk/Cont 11:56, 2 October 2009 (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.