Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Chicka Chicka Boom Boom and Other Coconutty Songs


 * 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   merge to Chicka Chicka Boom Boom. J04n(talk page) 23:37, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

Chicka Chicka Boom Boom and Other Coconutty Songs

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Tagged for notability since Jan 2008. I cannot find independent references/reviews of the album (as opposed to the book it's based on). -- Michael Scott Cuthbert (talk) 05:37, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * There's a level of difficulty with sources, as I'm seeing where some are shortening the title to just "Chicka Chicka Boom Boom". I do see where it's won a few awards, though.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:18, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Undecided, leaning towards a merge and redirect. I did find where the album won a Parent's Choice Award and got included on one of the ALA's yearly lists, but I'm not entirely sure this really needs its own entry. So far I've created a section on the main page for the book and pretty much summarized this entire entry in just a few sentences. This album does seem to be used in classes, but it's used along with the book rather than separately from it. This could probably pass notability guidelines, but the question is whether or not it'd be better served by being summarized in the main article rather than a separate entry. Do we really need two separate entries in this particular case? Anything written about the album's educational merits would be along the same lines of why the book is used, which could be summed up more succinctly in one article. I won't protest a separate article being kept, but this is something to think about.Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   09:34, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the book, I think. Deb (talk) 12:53, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Redirect to the book. Even if this is marginally notable (which I'm not sure of), it's more sensible to discuss it in the context of the book. Doesn't seem to be much to say about the album, as there's unlikely to be the same level of reviews, making-of information, etc, you get with a pop or classical recording. --Colapeninsula (talk) 16:04, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect per Tokyogirl79. Much more useful to discuss this in the context of the book.  There's also a popular Weston Woods-produced video\, which could be mentioned in the book article as well; School Library Journal quotes a reviewer, "If you watch the video, you’ll never get the tune out of your head when you read the book aloud. I’m still not sure if that is a good or bad thing."  That's accurate, I'm afraid. :-)  --Arxiloxos (talk) 16:37, 1 March 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:09, 3 March 2013 (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.