Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/My Chick Bad
Source: 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The result was Keep I'm reading this as a nomination withdrawn and therefore a
Boldly closing discussion as per WP:non-admin closure. Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 07:00, 17 September 2010 (UTC) Dylanfromthenorth (talk) 07:00, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply
]
My Chick Bad
- My Chick Bad (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
A single that only reached number 11 on the Billboard top 100. Coverage of the song on the album page should suffice. A seperate article seems excessive, despite good sourcing.--Atlantictire (talk) 04:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep Are you off your rocker?! This is in no way redundant. The sources discuss the single in quite a great amount of detail, and I'm surprised that you'd think #11 to be a trivial peak on the Hot 100. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 05:19, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep Wow...just wow. Candyo32 05:43, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep and trout slap the nominator for wasting people's time with such idiotic nominations. — Legolas (talk2me) 06:07, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Speedy keep and ditto comments above (I can't think of any original witty statements myself). ]
- Speedy Keep - WTF? Did someone smoke something? I suggest you read WP:NMUSIC. If a song charts on one chart even if its a 100 its allowed a page, if it has reliable refs and a fair amount of coverage as well its 100% is allowed a page. I suggest you strongly rethink reading these before making any more BS deletions noms when the song is clearly notable and dont waste peoples time. Im not meaning to be rude, but come on, this is insanely dumb. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 06:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep It's cool guys. Just wasn't sure if wikipedia allowed articles about songs that weren't in the top 10 or weren't "classics".--Atlantictire (talk) 06:33, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the ]
- 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.