Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Every Sperm Is Sacred

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 Snowball keep, via well-argued reasoning of Drmies and subsequent cleanup. Grutness...wha? 00:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Every Sperm Is Sacred[edit]

I fail to see how this particular song is in any way notable. No references, not lined on the Python navbox, and consists mostly of expanding the plot of one section of the Meaning of Life. -mattbuck (Talk) 02:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep--OK, this is a very not-so-good article, so to speak, also without any reference whatsoever, and that's really unfortunate since the song, the phrase, and the content of the skit are highly relevant. I don't rightly know how to start rewriting the article, but this search, for the phrase on Google Books, clearly gives a lot of notable hits. The song/phrase is taken as an example of anti-Catholicism, is adapted ("Every cell is sacred") to include cloning, has become something of a fighting song for pro-choice activists, etc. It is cited in books on God and atheism [1], books on the, ahem, penis, and more books on the ahem penis, it's cited in the Encyclopedia of British Humorists...need I go on? Keep. Drmies (talk) 03:28, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Drmies. JavaTenor (talk) 04:15, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Drmies has it exactly right.--S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 11:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Drmies. A long tradition of British anti-Catholicism (and anti-Irish sentiment) bears comic fruit in this song: the video is a parody of the Oliver musical that makes a pointed claim that Roman Catholic opposition to birth control leads to slum conditions and poverty. - Smerdis of Tlön (talk) 15:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, you all seem to know your stuff. I'm working a bit on the article and need some help--it's not just a song, it's also a scene (or skit?). Please drop by and help me find the appropriate wording, consistently, throughout the article. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 16:09, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Snow keep as improved article shows notability. Good job Dries! Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 17:57, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I learned from the master... Drmies (talk) 18:58, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 18:55, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - Great cleanup and sourcing Drmies! LinguistAtLarge • Msg 19:25, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Encyclopedic, well-sourced.--Michig (talk) 21:27, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The range and depth of sources alone speaks for the sketch's notability. Further, the sketch is not only culturally notable as comedy, but is notable as a satire upon social and religious issues. The article seems to cover this, in its present incarnation. Ddawkins73 (talk) 21:36, 2 February 2009 (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.