Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Night of the Living Rednecks

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 redirect to Give Me Convenience or Give Me Death. Clear consensus for redirect because of lack of independent notability. Per request, I'll delete the underlying article first, and leave the redirect on my watchlist. Qwyrxian (talk) 09:27, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Night of the Living Rednecks

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

Contested PROD. PROD rationale was "Fails WP:NSONGS. Was never released as a single, no independent notability, no evidence of significant secondary source coverage. Nothing here but a recounting of the live banter delivered on the track, no hope of ever being more than a stub." 1 source added at the 11th hour that is just a video of the track in question and doesn't give significant coverage. I searched for any significant coverage and all I found was 2 sentences in an Allmusic review of the album Give Me Convenience or Give Me Death. Even if you put these 2 sources together it wouldn't be significant enough coverage to justify a stand-alone article. Several other related articles (all non-notable Dead Kennedys songs) were also PRODed and deleted for the same reasons [Pull My Strings, Moon Over Marin, Jock-O-Rama (Invasion of the Beef Patrol), A Growing Boy Needs His Lunch, and Buzzbomb (song)]. IllaZilla (talk) 16:33, 20 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 21:19, 21 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:07, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge to Dead Kennedys. Northamerica1000^(talk) 15:27, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
What do you see in the article that could/should be merged to the band article? The song is just a recording of some live stage banter, the singer telling a story about having a fight with some rednecks. The article is just a recounting of the stage banter. It's got no significance to the band's career as a whole, and there are no sourced statements to carry over even if it was significant. --IllaZilla (talk) 21:19, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as fancruft. Of course diehards will talk about this on fansites, and that's cool, but it's not an encyclopedic topic. Here you need independent sources to establish notability, among other things.--DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 15:04, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect to Give Me Convenience or Give Me Death, where the song is mentioned in the track listing. If a song is not notable then WP:NSONGS says that it should be merged or redirected, not deleted. — Mr. Stradivarius ^{(have a chat)} 05:04, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect Obviously, along with all the other PRODed DK titles mentioned on the nom. No, they probably should not have their own articles, but redirecting is the usual course of action when both the band and the album are notable, which is clearly the case here. Beeblebrox (talk) 16:54, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have no objection to the title existing as a redirect to Give Me Convenience or Give Me Death; that makes perfect sense. My problem is that "redirect" closes always result in the admin just redirecting the title without deleting any of the content, which I could've just done myself without bothering with an AfD. The result is that, even though we all seem to agree this isn't a topic that should have an article and the content isn't worth keeping, the article is still preserved in the history. Thus anyone who disagrees with the AfD outcome can just come along an un-redirect it. I've had to keep dozens of redirected articles on my watchlist over the years just to keep reverting them whenever some IP or edit-warrer comes along and restores 'em. A proper "redirect" close, IMO, would involve deleting the content and then creating a redirect at the title. That way it couldn't be reverted. --IllaZilla (talk) 19:01, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect per WP:NSONGS. Not a single, not on any charts. Not mentioned in any third party sources. I'm sure it's an important song according to fans of the band, but non-notable songs should be covered with due weight in another article. Vcessayist (talk) 00:02, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Redirect or delete. Not notable per WP:NSONGS. The article has one reference, the article is longer than the reference, and the article says the author (a fan of the band) had never heard of this obscure performance before. Worth about one line in the band article at most. --John Nagle (talk) 06:18, 8 October 2012 (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.