Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Frosty the Dopeman

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. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:42, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Frosty the Dopeman

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

Article does not cite any sources except a lyrics site madmusic and a link to an article that does not mention the subject. The original performing artist/composer Zydiak is not notable, but there is a somewhat credible claim of significance, albeit unsupported by any sources, so A9. No indication of importance (musical recordings) does not apply and I am bringing it here. Mduvekot (talk) 16:43, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article should not be speedy deleted as being about a musical recording that does not indicate its own importance and where the artist's article does not exist, because... This song has a 45-year history of influencing popular culture. It appears on at least 3 different published LPS, has forty or more different versions of the song appearing on Youtube (by various artists), was mentioned in a Hollywood film by a major studio, and has been written about in three books including a scholarly psychology treatise about the influence of music on the mind.

Kokain in der Musik : Bestandaufnahme und Analyse aus kriminologischer Perspektive, Kemper Wolf-Reinhard, Dissertation Bremen 2000, page 321, Nr. 107.

Just Say Noel : A History of Christmas from the Nativity to the Nineties, Comfort, David, Fireside – Simon & Schuster, 1995, page 64.

The Curious World of Drugs and Their Friends – A Very Trippy Miscellany, Niermann Ingo and Sack, Adriano, Plume / Penguin Books, 2008, page 117. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dementofan (talk • contribs) 20:36, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You're making a lot of bold claims here, with very little in the way of easily verifiable proof. Book sources are allowed, but do you have anything in the way of internet sources about this song? (Not YouTube videos of covers though - that part of your argument has no relevance saw to whether or not a Wikipedia article should exist.) Sergecross73 msg me 01:22, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not convinced that this sentence: Avoiding Frebergs's fate, artists of the 1960s kept things between the lines in such hits as "Frosty the Dopeman" and "The Twelve Drugs of Christmas." from Just Say Noel: A History of Christmas from the Nativity to the Nineties helps to establish the notability for the song. Mduvekot (talk) 02:10, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm equally unimpressed with the mention in Kokain in der Musik: Bestandsaufnahme und Analyse aus kriminologischer Sicht which gives the lyrics, data for the recording on the Rhino label and makes no mention of influencing anyone. As for Nierman & Sacks's book, I can't see any mention of Frosty The Dopeman at all. Let's be very clear about how we consider notability in a case like thise: It doesn't matter how many covers exist on Youtube unless someone wrote about them and it was published in independent, reliable sources. I have seen no evidence that this is the case. Mduvekot (talk) 02:26, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I don't believe the article creator has any conception of Wikipedia's notability requirements, nor do I believe anything presented proves notability. I was merely starting with the basics and seeing if they had anything I could read about the subject at all. My google search only brought up unhelpful links like YouTube/SoundCloud covers and Urban Dictionary entires. Sergecross73 msg me 03:34, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:39, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Fictional elements-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:39, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of United States of America-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 22:40, 15 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - For total lack of coverage in reliable sources. I usually have some leeway with 1960s/70s music but I cannot overlook the subject's failure of WP:GNG. The article creator's argument was also not convincing.TheGracefulSlick (talk) 07:12, 16 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I'm not finding any significant coverage to demonstrate that this meets WP:GNG or WP:NSONG. gongshow talk 21:30, 17 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Doesnt have the sourcing needed to meet the WP:GNG - I've found nothing significant online, and the book sources appear to merely be passing mentions. All other claims to keep it seem to be based around unsubstantiated or invalid claims. Sergecross73 msg me 19:19, 18 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - I was going to suggest merge with Mark Zydiak's article but then saw that he's not on the site either. I looked him up on Discogs and what little info I found on him doesn't mention this song.[[1]] I searched for the song on Amazon and found this showing 6 cover version but not much more.[[2]] I also feel that if this song was culturally significant, there'd be some coverage readily available. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:58, 22 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Fails the GNG.L3X1 (distænt write) 00:45, 23 August 2017 (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.