Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ice cream and cake

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 of the debate was delete. Shanel 00:30, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

[edit] ice cream and cake

This article doesn't appear to be useful to me. It's just lyrics to a song, so it should be deleted. Science3456 23:55, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

• Delete per nom.--DMG413 23:59, 11 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep. It should be cleaned up though. 64.192.107.242 00:04, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Strong if not speedy Delete pure nonsense, violates let me see... everything. Eivind 00:06, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Speedy Delete G1. Delete. Non-notable song, no real content. WarpstarRider 00:24, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Keep and Clean up. Not a speedy candidate. http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=ice-cream-and-cake&btnG=Google+Search StarTrek 00:30, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment - Afd and speedy deletion are different things. --Khoikhoi 02:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete The only thing making Peanut Butter Jelly Time, another song by the Buckwheat Boys, notable was part of a notable internet phenomenon. This song doesn't have the benefit of such an association. It appears on no album and has never charted. The Google results above (85,000 hits) are misleading, as most of those links refer to food, rather than to this song. Searching "Ice cream and cake" "buckwheat boys" returns only 518 hits, nearly all of which are lyric databases. I can't imagine the article evolving beyond what it is now, and in its current state it's probably a copyright violation. Can someone who voted keep provide me with a rationale? --djrobgordon 01:05, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete as copyvio. There is not enough verifiable material about this to justify a standalone article. Capitalistroadster 01:08, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, current article is probably copyvio and this doesn't seem worthy of an article anyway. -- Mithent 01:25, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per above --Khoikhoi 02:26, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom, copyvio. --Terence Ong 02:37, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia:Lyrics and poetry kotepho 21:58, 12 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, pretty much patent nonsense anyway. Stifle 23:25, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, utter nonsense. Chairman S. ^Talk 08:39, 14 March 2006 (UTC)
• Delete with a passing hearty chuckle. Grandmasterka 21:29, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

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.