Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tere Sang Yaara


 * 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 no consensus.  So Why  07:29, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

Tere Sang Yaara

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The subject does not have WP:SIGCOV. The only reliable and independent source I could find was financial express (used in article). Rest of the sources are not independent, or reliable. Reliable sources mentions the song passingly while discussing about the film it is from, or the actors/singers. Fails WP:GNG. Passes WP:MILL though; one of thousands of songs from bollywood. This song can be discussed appropriately in the article of the film it is from. — usernamekiran (talk)  15:09, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment- Thanks for reviewing the article Tere Sang Yaara ,but the article do have independent coverage from the India's reputed and reliable news media like Indian Express and Times of India, please do check each citation in the footnotes. WP:GNG guidelines mentions that the notability criteria for song article is to have independent coverage at least from one reliable source ,or to have genres which the article has.So how does it fails notability ?Anoptimistix (talk) 07:38, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
 * "notability criteria for song article is to have independent coverage at least from one reliable source." By that logic, almost 90% of Indian songs released after 2010 would get an article, that is literally thousands of songs. And I dont think GNG states "one reliable source is enough". Also, as mentioned in the nomination, the reliable sources make passing reference to song. And the rest of the sources are not "independent of the subject". It is the job of these sources/websites to discuss songs, hence they are not independent of the subject. — usernamekiran (talk)  14:08, 3 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:51, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU (T) 18:54, 1 July 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment-I will once again request you to check all citations properly, it is very well sourced ,it has independent coverage from the repute and reliable news media like Times of India, Indian Express ! These coverages proves it's notability.Anoptimistix (talk) 02:55, 5 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete reprinting of a press release is not an indicator of notability. This song lacks significant coverage. Because notability is not inherited, it does not matter even if the author, singer and film were all notable.  That does not make the song notable. --Bejnar (talk) 02:03, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - The article is well sourced. For general information more than 80 percent of notable song from India mostly in Hindi are from Bollywood films, because contrary to North America, India doesn't have a separate independent music sponsoring music industry of its own, so of course doesn't matter how much is the notbility of a song, a film associated with it will always get mentioned. Please don't delete, you can verify it's notability from the web. It is one of the very notable song in India of year 2016.Further the song has many reliable and significant coverages please do check citations. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anoptimistix (talk • contribs)
 * Redirect--to Rustom (film).Fails WP:NSONGS.WP:MILL covg.Usual promotional hype generated around any song. Winged Blades Godric 09:06, 9 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep, only because I see two sources that are giving it enough coverage to qualify as "significant" and are clearly reliable and independent. As for passing GNG, that just barely makes the grade, but barely is all you need.  Dennis Brown - 2&cent; 00:23, 10 July 2017 (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.