Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ur So Gay


 * 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. Consensus is for the article to be retained. North America1000 21:21, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Ur So Gay

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This song does not meet the criteria at WP:NSONGS. "A single requires its own notability, and that notability is not inherited and requires independent evidence. That a single is an officially released recording by a notable musician or ensemble is not by itself reason for a standalone article."

Despite the fact that this is not even a single, but a promo single, it fails to meet the notability guideline for either. The current article is too small and most of it is just fluff too. This song is simply not notable, and a gold certification or coverage from just once source doesn't make it so. I say "Merge" with One of the Boys (Katy Perry album). Shane Cyrus (talk) 09:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:16, 20 February 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep - It's a Gold-selling song according to RIAA/Billboard and Topped the U.S. Dance Charts in 2008. Topping a chart and sellign half a million copies are extremely strong indicators of notability. Sergecross73   msg me  15:47, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Being released as a single or not is irrelevant, it's about whether or not the song has received significant coverage in reliable sources. There is a review of the single in Billboard, however. In addition to Entertainment Weekly and Today.com mentions, there does seem to have been a fair amount of discussion on the song's lyrics and whether the song is homophobic or not. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 17:31, 21 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep - The amount of sources are overwhelming. Article itself is poorly written and hasn't been touched in ages, however a quick google search shows sizeable media coverage. Strong keep.  Gia co bbe  talk 04:23, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep per above comments. Article is in poor shape, but it has enough independent coverage to warrant its own article. Aoba47 (talk) 17:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep definitely covered enough in unaffiliated sources outside of album reviews to warrant an article. While the Today.com link that Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars is based on Katy's own comments (and thus isn't enough by itself as that's just self-promotion), the Billboard and Entertainmeny Weekly links are definitely enough to show this got enough attention for a page and there was controversy over its lyrics (even if minor compared to "I Kissed A Girl"). Charts, certifications, sales, and single release (or lack thereof) aren't definitive factors in whether songs warrant their own pages. As Aoba and Giacobbe indicated, the article needs work, but it certainly can be kept. Snuggums (talk / edits) 22:01, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. --- Another Believer ( Talk ) 22:31, 22 February 2017 (UTC)
 * KeepCyberjoel95 (talk) 22:35, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep --Emir Özen (talk) 17:31, 24 February 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.