Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Cosas De La Vida (song)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 Drama Queen (Ivy Queen album). SarahStierch (talk) 02:41, 12 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cosas De La Vida (song)[edit]

Cosas De La Vida (song) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs· FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Possibly fails WP:NSONG. Although there's a substantial amount of text in the article, only one source that isn't just a list of tracks on the album is actually an original, reliable source for the album: People En Espanol. (One other source is just a word-for word copy of the People text: here). The article is mostly album background (including much about the album's composition and recording) derived from Drama Queen (Ivy Queen album), where this information belongs. BobAmnertiopsisChatMe! 01:22, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 06:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Puerto Rico-related deletion discussions. Northamerica1000(talk) 06:01, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect or Delete or Merge (whatever works) I struggled to find reliable secondary sources in English and Spanish. I can't see how this song passes our notability guidelines. I appreciate the good work of the editor who created the article though. SarahStierch (talk) 17:29, 24 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Redirecting seems like the best course of action, by itself it hardly seems notable. - Caribbean~H.Q. 09:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | Talk 02:57, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, SarahStierch (talk) 00:06, 5 December 2013 (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.