Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buffyverse tracklist


 * 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 delete. Jaranda wat's sup Sports! 01:21, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Buffyverse tracklist

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete - for the same reasons that many other song lists from TV shows were deleted, including The Office (US), The Office (UK), House, Skins, and many others. Directory of loosely associated items. Otto4711 17:14, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete This is a list of songs that were played in a TV show.  Completely in universe plot information with no real world notability.   Transwiki to [Buffyverse] if deemed appropriate.   We shouldnt get in the business of documenting every song ever played on any TV show Corpx 17:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong keep, because incredibly extensive, well-organized article about a notable show. --  Le Grand Roi des Citrouilles  Tally-ho! 18:06, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as this is more than just a list of songs played in a TV show, but rather a list that has been sorted by episode. This is in some ways equivalent to the score of a TV show, and in other ways, a notable marketing tool.   and there are others.  At the least though, this might be redirected to the existing soundtrack.FrozenPurpleCube 18:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - It almost seems a shame to edge towards delete, as clearly a lot of work has been put into this list. However, it violates a chunk of WP:NOT, namely WP:NOT and WP:NOT. The Islander 18:33, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Statistics? No, as there's nothing long or sprawling about this.  Directory *may* be closer, but I'm not sure it's actually persuasive in this case.  There's nothing loosely associated about this, these are songs that featured in a television program.  That's a clear and explicit criteria.  White Page?  Nope.  Program Guide?  Resource for conducting business?  It's not a Sales Catalog either.  I suppose with a literal interpretation of "directory" it could be construed as such, as it is a list of information, but sometimes that's the best way to organize this kind of information.  It's not like we don't include songs that were featured in Movies, or in episodes of television shows in the articles themselves.  FrozenPurpleCube 18:44, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry, poor choice of link on my part. I was refering to this: "6. Trivia collections. Large sections of indirectly-related details should be avoided as they diminish articles' overall readability and utility." Now, maybe this isn't 100% relevant here, as it's a whole article as opposed to a section, but my view is that it still applies. As for WP:NOT: "Lists or repositories of loosely associated topics". I'm sorry, but in my opinion this list is very loosely associated. You could come up with hundreds of thousands of such lists by looking at different programmes - it's just regurgitation of information. To further my argument, I feel that this article also fails WP:N, specifically "Significant coverage". Yes, the programme most definitely has significant coverage, but the specific music within it, and thus this list? Not a chance. The Islander 18:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Trivia? No, I'm afraid that this list is in no way related to a trivia collection.  A trivia collection is far less related than this, which is actually a solidly connected theme, namely the songs played in a given television series.  That's not loose at all.  I don't see that significant coverage is needed overall, that's often a false standard, especially in this case where it doesn't matter what coverage there is, this is basically just facts, nothing more.  These facts would be included just as easily in the episode articles, and this is nothing more than a collation of the information from those pages in a conveniently accessible form.  And it should be on those pages.  It's not like the music that appears in a series isn't credited *or* often important.  Sometimes the inclusion of music is a marketing ploy.  (Though in the cases where that would be claimed, I'd suggest a source for the marketing.).  It's not like they don't make soundtracks based on songs used in a series. FrozenPurpleCube 00:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete, grouping songs together based upon which television show they have been used in appears to be little more than a collection of loosely related topics per WP:NOT. If the background music of the show were somehow more relevant to the series itself an argument might have been made for this list, but not as it stands. ɑʀкʏɑɴ 19:26, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator, this is just more buffycruft. Burntsauce 21:41, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Buffycruft, in fact, any argument which dismisses something as cruft, is not a persuasive argument. It reflects an opinion, but gives no reason for that.  I suggest avoiding usage of the term.  FrozenPurpleCube 00:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete as Buffycruft, repeat Buffycruft. Transwiki if Wikia will have it. Dbromage  [Talk]  01:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * See above. It's a bad idea to dismiss things as cruft instead of explaining the reasons for your position. FrozenPurpleCube 01:35, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Cruft refers (to me) articles created by fans of a fictional work, which is completely in-universe, and lacking any real world notability Corpx 02:15, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, that's inapplicable in this case, since it's not in-universe at all, but then, you didn't call it cruft in your own statement anyway. I do think you're mistaken, but that's your look-out.  In any case, cruft to me means nothing more than "I don't like this" except a bit more derogatory.  I advise avoiding its use.  Say things like you did, and I can at least respect the argument. FrozenPurpleCube 02:40, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * I beg to differ.  On the contrary, I do not think lists of things mentioned in a fictional work has any notability outside the show Corpx 05:04, 28 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, that's one thing, but it's not what I was objecting to in what you said, which was that the page was completely in-universe. These two things are not the same at all, and I don't know why you're confusing them, but it is certainly not accurate to claim they are in-universe. Most of the time the music is actually completely out of universe as the characters don't hear it at all.   The times when it is "in-universe" it's usually played by the Artist in question, which is actually something that does attract notice in the real-world.  Just look up the Michelle Branch appearance.  So if anything, it seems to me that the in-universe things are actually the ones most likely to be independently notable.  But I don't think independent notability is really worth getting into here.  I simply consider it valid to include the lists of songs that are used as a soundtrack. FrozenPurpleCube 05:39, 28 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete This is a directory of loosely associated topics. The songs aren't related by being in the shows. Picking two songs at random may show closely connected songs, but that's coincidental because the same bands were used multiple times. Jay32183 18:11, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Long and unnecessary, violates WP:NOT. Just because it's "extensive" and "well-organized" doesn't mean it's worthy. Rehevkor 19:46, 4 September 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.