Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Je veux bien


 * 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 5 (Alizée album).  MBisanz  talk 00:16, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Je veux bien

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no evidence that this meets the notability rules. All of the sources in the article are dependent on the subject of the article. Stefan2 (talk) 17:36, 13 April 2013 (UTC)


 * The article is only hours old, so it's not a surprise if it doesn't have yet much content nor sources. It's also part of Alizée's complete discography, which alone makes it relevant. I don't see any reason why it should be removed. RMJJRM (talk) 19:54, 13 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:52, 14 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Redirect to 5 (Alizée album). The song has not even been released yet. -- Whpq (talk) 18:44, 15 April 2013 (UTC)


 * The single has been already sent to radio station and the promotional CDs delivered. True that exact date for public release is still unclear but it will be released within next one month for sure. Even if it takes longer, it doesn't change the fact that the article serves greater purpose than just mentioning that it's her single. It's clearly important song for her career. If Sony wasn't such a pain in ass to work with, I'd ask the exact date but as it will most likely take longer to get the date from than the actual release, there's no point. IF the single doesn't get released within the next month or two, THEN we can consider again if this article is relevant or not. RMJJRM (talk) 19:44, 17 April 2013 (UTC)
 * Reply - the question is one of notability. What part of WP:GNG or WP:NSONG is satisfied to establish that this  song should have a standa lone article?  If this song is "clearly important song for her career", then that should be demonstrated with significant coverage in indpendent reliable sources. -- Whpq (talk) 20:50, 17 April 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 11:08, 20 April 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.