Deletion of Tequila Mockingbird (song)

Comment: to Tequila Mockingbird (album article) -- Allow me to offer a compromise. I have been following this bizarre discussion and must conclude that everyone has made valid points, though Rosedelune could have done it with 95% fewer words and without the accusations of bad faith. Everyone here is a volunteer and Wikipedia:Consensus|consensus is one of the basic philosophies of Wikipedia. What matters is whether this song is |notable enough for ''its own article'', and I must conclude that it is not, because it does not have enough specific and in-depth coverage in its own right, beyond passing mentions in works that are actually about the albums on which it appears or events at which it was played. The song certainly has a place in jazz history, but Rosedelune has not made a convincing argument on why that history ''must'' be in a separate article as opposed to saying it within the album article, where it is entirely valid to say something like "The title track was remade with new lyrics by Roxanne Seeman etc. etc." Rosedelune, if you would like to respond please do so in a reasonable number of words and consider paragraph breaks too
Stance: merge
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:NSONG)

Comment: As an article Tequila Mockingbird (song) adheres to otability (music)#Songs under sub note 3 and otability (music)#Recordings under sub notes 1, 5 & 6. As a result the article is thoroughly notable and should thus be kept altogether
Stance: keep
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:N||WP:N)

Comment: fails the , and  won’t change that. There’s just no reason this needs to be spun out into its own article. Don’t be fooled by the reception section, it’s either mundane passing comments or massive direct quotes that appear to be there mostly to bulk up its size, as they are far too long and meander from discussing the song itself
Stance: delete
Cited policy: Wikipedia:Notability (WP:GNG||WP:BOMBARD)