Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Binaca Geetmala records


 * 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. J04n(talk page) 18:43, 8 January 2018 (UTC)

List of Binaca Geetmala records

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Per WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:NOR. There is no doubt that Binaca Geetmala itself is notable, but this is a disparate collection of records and statistics sourced to a single blog post. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 14:35, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 14:35, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 14:35, 31 December 2017 (UTC)


 * Merge - Thank you for informing me. I didn't think it may be insignificant. If it is deleted, I've no saying. But I think before deleted, this stats should be added to the main Binaca Geetmala article as a column. I actually thought that if there is billboard top chart records in a seperate article then why shouldn't be about Binaca Geetmala? মাখামাখি (talk) 14:49, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete -Because apart from being indiscriminate collection and original reaserch, the article is completely replication of list from blog post, utter unreliable source. Don't merge indiscriminate information from unreliable source to pollute another article. –Ammarpad (talk) 15:39, 31 December 2017 (UTC)
 * I note that the article List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and milestones has been nominated for deletion four times and each time has been kept. Is there any reason why this equivalent article for India, a more populous contry that the one served by Billboard and where popular music is just as popular, should be treated differently? This is not an WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, because the other stuff was discussed and kept at AfD. I also note that we have a category with over 200 members devoted to the Billboard charts. To delete one of the articles about the equivalent charts for India would seem like systemic bias in the extreme. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 17:58, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The difference would be the difference in coverage in independent, reliable sources. That is all we're really concerned with. List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and milestones cites dozens of articles and several full-length books that discuss Billboard records and statistics. This article was only sourced to a blog post, and I was not able to find anything else. Our efforts at countering systematic bias can't extend to including topics where no sources have been shown to exist. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 18:17, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * The difference is in coverage in independent reliable sources available in English from Google searches, not in such sources in general. It was accepted in the deletion discussions for the Billboard equivalent that sources from Billboard itself are sufficient and that other sources must be available, even if not found yet. We should give the same consideration to topics outside the anglophone world. 86.17.222.157 (talk) 19:37, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Sure, and if you or someone else could point to sources in other languages, I would be happy to withdraw. –&#8239;Joe (talk) 20:05, 1 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOR as two out of three sources are links to blogs/self published sources. Also WP:NOTSTATS and WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. Ajf773 (talk) 03:45, 4 January 2018 (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.