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 OK Orchestra. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:12, 15 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK Overture (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)

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

Per NSONG: Coverage of a song in the context of an album review does not establish notability. If the only coverage of a song occurs in the context of reviews of the album on which it appears, that material should be contained in the album article and an independent article about the song should not be created.

I have found no coverage of this song outside of the context of reviews of the album. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. voorts (talk/contributions) 15:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also per WP:NSONG: "Has been ranked on national or significant music or sales charts". Although this criteria additionally states "Note again that this indicates only that a song may be notable, not that it is notable", there is sufficient coverage of the song through album reviews and interviews to create a reasonably detailed article. Koopastar (talk) 17:39, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article is only as large as it is because it excessively quotes just about everything anyone has ever said about the song, including from user-generated MuseScore and a podcast interview. The amount of content WP should include about the song would fit fine in the album article. Mach61 (talk) 18:43, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge per nom. Also, the rest of the creators’ articles really ought to be cut down a good bit. Mach61 (talk) 18:38, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to OK Orchestra per nomination. I also didn't find any coverage. What's in the article is largely unreliably sourced and there doesn't appear to be much that can be merged, though I won't oppose that outcome if that's still preferred. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:13, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to OK Orchestra per above. I had originally created this article as a redirect, as I did not think it was notable enough for its own article, and nothing has really changed since then. User:Koopastar has fleshed out a decent number of songs that unfortunately fall into fancruft (see this table on their user page) that could all for the most part be deleted or turned into redirects. iWillBanU (User:Mattx8y) ^{what did i fuck up now} 23:02, 8 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to OK Orchestra for many of the reasons discussed. There is just a lot of unnecessary fluff here to expand the article. I agree a review of the author's other article creations may be in order. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 02:40, 9 October 2023 (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.