Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andito Tayo Para sa Isa't Isa (2nd nomination)


 * 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 delete. As this appears to be the third time that the community has found this subject unsuitable at AfD, the title will also be protected against recreation. Seraphimblade Talk to me 08:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)

Andito Tayo Para sa Isa't Isa
AfDs for this article:


 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:NSONG, and per previous discussions Articles for deletion/Andito Tayo Para sa Isa't Isa and Articles for deletion/Love Shines (2019 song). Chompy Ace 06:08, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Philippines. Chompy Ace 06:08, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete and salt. Previously deleted for failing WP:NSONGS; still fails that criteria. Sources from ABS-CBN cannot be used here. — hueman1 ( talk •  contributions ) 04:44, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Article improved by by adding the 6th source. Well, I don't know if it will pass NSONG or not. Also the third source mentioning MOR and ABS-CBN Regional, I guess that passes NSONG under the 3rd rule, looks like a cover version of the song. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 10:29, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete (again) - I see no improvement since the first AfD last year. Just because we found another media source that repeated the basic fact that the song exists, that doesn't mean its notability has improved. It's still just a promotional song that was promoted by the media network that was trying to get promotion from it. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 13:46, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Please check the latest improvements. Thank you.Troy26Castillo (talk) 20:08, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment. Having dissected the sources, I have found that none of them satisfies the general notability guideline (see full table below).


 * — hueman1 ( talk •  contributions ) 11:24, 23 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete per my same reasoning at Articles for deletion/Love Shines (2019 song), and the keeps are advised to learn what the difference between news and promotional content is, as defined by the SAT above; the Lionheart source needs to be reminded that bots often milk numbers for streams, and any refresh of the page counts as a view. As for the added source #6, it would actually be news if ABS-CBN decided that service workers should suffer and be insulted in song; being pandered to watch a television network in verse is the entire point of television network Christmas songs.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 00:17, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment This is the reply for the sources review of ; First and foremost thank you. Regarding the Lionheart links, it has been removed and replaced.Troy26Castillo (talk) 05:55, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * What is your opinion on the improvement? SeanJ 2007 (talk) 06:46, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * The so-called "Philippine News" isn't reliable. Village Pipol (I doubt its reliability), Nylon Manila, and BusinessWorld merely mention the song (all failing WP:SIGCOV. I don't see that as an improvement. It seems like we're beating a dead horse here. I would also like to echo Nate's comment up there: the keeps are advised to learn what the difference between news and promotional content is. — hueman1 ( talk •  contributions ) 03:50, 25 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep the Philstar coverage is significant and this article has enough sourced content to pass WP:NSONG. Just because a song is promotional (such as the John Lewis christmas adverts in the UK) does not mean it cannot be notable, imv Atlantic306 (talk) 20:56, 24 September 2022 (UTC)
 * In what way is Philstar's coverage significant? — hueman1 ( talk •  contributions ) 03:38, 25 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Comment No neutral news story would ask its readers to send a video singing the song to the network, nor extol them to purchase T-shirts and masks involving the song. The Philstar source is 100% WP:PROMO spon-con.  Nate  • ( chatter ) 05:32, 25 September 2022 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 07:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Weak delete still doesn't meet WP:NSONG per same reason from my previous AfD stand, after HueMan1 presented the above sources as found non-WP:GNG. CruzRamiss2002 (talk) 10:47, 26 September 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Keep passes WP:NSONG. DraggyWiki (talk) 23:43, 29 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete as per CruzRamiss2002 and Mrschimpf. Fails WP:NSONG. Howard the Duck (talk) 02:09, 1 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Delete: Sourcing just isn't there currently, and it's clearly an ongoing issue that hasn't been resolved yet and isn't likely to be fixed. QuietHere (talk) 06:10, 5 October 2022 (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.