Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Don't Mess Up This Good Thing


 * 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 and redirect. Failure to provide references is a reason to delete the article. An assertion of notability is worthless if you are unable or unwilling to provide evidence to back it up. Neıl ☎  10:28, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't Mess Up This Good Thing
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The article is too vague and has no soures Olliyeah (talk) 14:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Merge and redirect to Janet Jackson. The article makes it's own case for non-notability. Since the article only contains three sentences, I won't even bother copy/pasting my reasoning, because that would be the entire article! Yng  varr  14:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * speedy keep or merge Again, needing references (or "vague") isn't a reason to delete an article and is a non-argument for deletion, unless you can point to the Wikipedia policy that states this. If sources can't be FOUND (assuming you first look) then that is a reason, via WP:V and WP:RS.  Nom is fatally flawed for non reason.  Pharmboy (talk) 15:17, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Pharmboy, nominating obviously notable singles could be seen as disruptive.--h i s  s p a c e   r e s e a r c h 16:39, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.   -- --  pb30 < talk > 18:02, 31 December 2007 (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.