Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/I Still Play

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) feminist (talk) 12:28, 3 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I Still Play

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Not a notable piece. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Walter Görlitz (talk) 05:42, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

What is the criteria for a notable piece? John Adams is arguably the most frequently performed of all living American classical composers, and his compositions for solo piano are rare occasions and paid attention to closely in the classical world. All other John Adams Piano compositions have their own wikipedia pages.--Vst631 (talk) 15:29, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- WP:NSONG or WP:GNG. I do not believe that Wikipedia:WikiProject Classical music have their own notability criteria. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:52, 13 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, RL0919 (talk) 10:39, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I think this article falls in a grey area, but some cursory Google searches have found enough references to it (the Los Angeles Times, The New York Times, The Mercury News, etc.) to justify its existence enough for me. The article needs severe cleaning, no doubt, which I am undertaking now. Jg2904 (talk) 13:32, 20 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:04, 27 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Jg2904 and taking into account their cleanup. Darylgolden^(talk) Ping when replying 06:03, 28 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep i feel there is enough coverage about this piece in reliable sources to pass the WP:GNG. Thanks Jg2904 for your cleanup efforts. Zingarese talk · contribs 02:36, 1 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I agree with Vst631's contention. GeneralPoxter (talk) 02:40, 2 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Jg2904 and Zingarese. Aoba47 (talk) 18:44, 2 November 2019 (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.