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 Sorry for Party Rocking. Black Kite (t) (c) 23:44, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for Party Rocking (song)

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

fails WP:NSONGS. random album track. completely unreferenced. no charting (ref for the charting claim didnt exist), no third party coverage. doesn't deserve an article. Mister sparky (talk) 19:01, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. —Tom Morris (talk) 19:43, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

If I'd include the charting the article would be deleted anyways, it's always like that... -- SpongePappy (talk) 20:27, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

charting in 1 place is just 1 aspect of the criteria. it fails in all the others. it's a random album track that doesn't deserve it's own article. Mister sparky (talk) 21:06, 23 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to album. The song charted rather low and is unlikely to expand beyond a stub. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 19:01, 24 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I hate to have to say this, but if "Sexy and I Know It" (which charted even higher) doesn't have its own article, then this one shouldn't either. If one has its own article, then they both should. Best, --Discographer (talk) 21:59, 25 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I could make that article, but as soon as it's made, someone wants to delete it again :( -- $pongeP@ppy (talk) 00:30, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

because they are just random album tracks that don't deserve their own articles. there's just not enough info to warrant it. if they are confirmed by official sources to be future singles then they could be kept. Mister sparky (talk) 17:14, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The single cover says it all. If it didn't have a cover then it wouldn't be a single. P.S. If you think the cover is fake, it can't be fake cause NOBODY could fake such a cover ;) -- L-M-F-A-O-! (talk) 21:28, 27 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect to the album per Hammer. Rlendog (talk) 21:01, 30 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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.