Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/New Math (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 keep. Per WP:SNOW and nominator has withdrawn. (non-admin closure) Jovanmilic97 (talk) 19:40, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

New Math (song)

[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)

~~Sits here without a single RS ref since Day One. Staszek Lem (talk) 02:26, 11 October 2019 (UTC)~~[reply]

Withdrawn , thx TPH. Staszek Lem (talk) 18:11, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the sources I added. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:35, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep - Of the sources introduced, only two of them, the "New Math" book, and the article from The Hindu, discuss the song for more than a sentence or two, and only the latter of them really goes in-depth on its coverage. But that might just be enough to let it pass the WP:GNG. Even if others disagree, however, it should not be Deleted, as it would definitely serve as a valid Redirect to That Was the Year That Was. Rorshacma (talk) 05:12, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Mathematics-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:02, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 06:03, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Google scholar has 150 hits for "tom lehrer" "new math". Most of these are reliably published sources. Some of them are one-line mentions. But I think enough of them have some in-depth coverage of the song to make notability clear. See also a previous attempt by the nominator to delete a different mathematical song by Tom Lehrer, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lobachevsky (song). —David Eppstein (talk) 07:25, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep or merge into That Was the Year That Was. Although it is well known song mentioned in a lot of places, notability is somewhat borderline because depth is lacking in most of the sources. Zerach (talk) 08:44, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Adequately sourced to establish notability. At worst, this could be merged, but there's no reason to trash the content. XOR'easter (talk) 17:07, 11 October 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.