Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Flute repertoire


 * 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 no consensus. I understand that this closure won't make anyone happy. But I don't find those advocating Keep or those who want Delete have strong policy grounding. I think the discussion occurring at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music should actually be turned into an official RFC which could provide guidance when articles like this one are nominated for a deletion discussion. Liz Read! Talk! 06:53, 16 September 2022 (UTC)

Flute repertoire

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Wikipedia is not a directory or an indiscriminate collection of instrument repertoires. This article claims to try and "present a representative sampling of the most commonly played and well-known works in the genre", but Wikipedia's goal isn't to provide flautists with a list of what to play. It is supposed to present readers with an encyclopedic overview of the flute's use in the orchestra, something that can be achieved with a concise section on the Western concert flute article.

For the page navigation of flute music, Category:Compositions for flute will suffice rather than a crufty list that may contain only twenty or so actually notable pieces. Why? I Ask (talk) 02:13, 2 September 2022 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz Read! Talk! 04:26, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and Lists. Why? I Ask (talk) 02:13, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom and WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. The number of flute compositions is almost endless, we don't need to list as many as we possibly can. Ajf773 (talk) 09:16, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Delete Unencyclopedic collection. Category:Compositions for flute is enough if anything related to this subject is necessary. >>> Extorc . talk  18:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - mainly for the rationale that this article has existed on Wikipedia since 2006, providing value (according to pageview data) to perhaps 140,000 or more readers. "Why, I ask?", indeed. I'm not in favor of a "years to build, seconds to destroy" mindset on Wikipedia, especially if the subject is notable. Here Under The Oaks (talk) 21:06, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Just because a page is old or even has a substantial viewer base does not mean it's worthy for an encyclopedia. (Although, I also disagree that 140,000 is a large number considering the age of the article and how it's linked from a Vital Article.) And certainly discussing flute repertoire and its popular, important pieces can be a wonderful addition to the project. I'm currently working on that as we speak with expanding the flute ensemble page. (And I would love to have help on that if you're interested!). However, discussing repertoire is best suited for prose rather than a listing of all pieces. Why? I Ask (talk) 23:56, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's quite cluttered, I agree, and whether or not it's notable is debatable. However, other orchestral instruments have their own repertoire page-some are lists, some are full articles. This should probably be discussed as a more broad change, instead of deleting these articles individually. Start a discussion on the Musical Instruments or Classical Music wikiprojects, maybe. Aven13 12:42, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @Aven13: I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music. Please join in the discussion! Why? I Ask (talk) 01:42, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Weak keep without prejudice - On one hand, Wikipedia is not IMSLP. On the other hand, I concur with the unnamed commenter above that this is really something that needs a wider discussion and AfD is not the best place to sort it out. De Guerre (talk) 08:20, 9 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @De Guerre: I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Classical music. Please join in the discussion! Why? I Ask (talk) 01:40, 11 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't agree with the rationale "It is supposed to present readers with an encyclopedic overview of the flute's use in the orchestra", because the role of the flute in the orchestra would indeed be a bottomless list. Instead, this list shows pieces where the flute dominates, and why not? While I'd not write such a thing, I'm happy that it exists for those readers interested in such things even if they will be a minority. I see Jerome Kohl and Toccata quarta among the editors who guarantee that it's solid and not cruft. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 15:54, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * If you feel that way, then please go vote on the WikiProject. And please, do not ever try and use deceased editors such as Jerome Kohl to support your rationale when they are not here to verify their opinions (and without a direct quote saying so). Why? I Ask (talk) 16:09, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I commented on the project page before you asked. Please check my talk for Jerome Kohl's name, or his talk archive, for that matter. I didn't say anything of opinion, just that the article wasn't only created by IPs but that those mentioned had an eye on it. Jerome Kohl added works, . --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:32, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * While splitting non-needed hairs, I technically asked you before your post (16:09 versus 16:14). And even if you did show me the diff instead of just saying "check his talk page", it's still in bad taste Why? I Ask (talk) 20:39, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I commented on the project before I saw that you asked here, because I was out for rehearsal and saw it only now. Which diff? My motto of the year is In Freundschaft, after an article he began and I took to GA in memory of him. User talk:Gerda Arendt: "I looked up to Jerome from the day he came in my life (in 2009, telling me that what a reliable source said about Stockhausen was wrong)". --Gerda Arendt (talk) 20:51, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * If you're going to make a statement for someone not present, it's courtesy to provide proof (i.e., a diff) showing that they would agree. Why? I Ask (talk) 23:19, 12 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I would, but I only said that he watched this article (from 2011 to 2019),, , and to it, which for me provides confidence in its content. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:38, 13 September 2022 (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.