Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Craigslist (song)
The article's first four references - http://news.cnet.com/8301-13577_3-10265362-36.htmlhttp://www.spinner.com/2009/06/15/weird-al-yankovic-craigslist-video-premiere/http://www.npr.org/blogs/monkeysee/2009/06/the_latest_from_weird_al_yanko_1.htmlhttp://www.escapistmagazine.com/news/view/92456-Weird-Al-Puts-The-Doors-on-Craigslist - plus this sampling of additional sources - http://www.wired.com/underwire/2009/06/weird-al-channels-the-lizard-king-on-craigslist/http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/entertainment/music/weird-al-yankovics-new-single-craiglist-homage-to-the-doors/story-e6frexl9-1225736491013http://buzzworthy.mtv.com/2009/06/16/new-video-weird-al-yankovic-craigslist/http://exclaim.ca/News/weird_al_taps_ray_manzarek_for_ode_to_craigslisthttp://www.upi.com/Entertainment_News/2009/06/16/Weird-Al-releases-Craigslist-single/UPI-23821245164649/ - demonstrate that the song has received significant coverage in multiple |reliable sources. Per , it is not suggested that a song ''must'' have been covered, charted or been awarded in order to be notable, only that those songs which fit that set of criteria are indeed "probably notable". The guideline goes on to state: "Notability aside, a separate article on a song is only appropriate when there is enough verifiable material to warrant a reasonably detailed article; articles unlikely ever to grow beyond stubs should be merged to articles about an artist or album." This implies a "reasonably detailed" song article is one that goes beyond a stub - a standard which in my estimation has been (or easily can be) satisfied given the information contained within the aforementioned sources
— User:Gongshow, 03:11, 2 June 2011 (UTC)
Stance: keep
Cited policy: WP:RS||WP:NSONGS (Wikipedia:Reliable sources)