Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Canadian musicians


 * 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 &mdash; Caknuck 07:30, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

List of Canadian musicians

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Redundant with Category:Canadian musicians. Since the page has an internal note stating that it is only for musicians that already have articles, it appears to serve no function that the category and its subcategories do not already provide. Chubbles 02:36, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. GreenJoe 03:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - This is a beautiful list. It is far more comprehensive than the category (which has only two entries), and this list includes annotations.  The Transhumanist 03:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete again, much better served with a category.  Inclusion criteria into this is way too loose  Corpx 06:38, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This is to big a list to be helpful. It will never contain more that a random selection of Canadian musicians.  Lists are useful compared to categories, but not lists this big, and forever changing.Obina 09:34, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - the category is virtually empty. If this list is deleted, then there will be no navigation aid for Canadian musicians at all.  The Transhumanist 21:45, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Agree this is redundant while Category: Canadian Musicians exist. - IamMcLovin 19:54, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't understand why lists are suddenly deletable. This is NOT the same content as any single category. Deleting this would remove a valuable alternate method for looking up this information. older ≠ wiser 01:33, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Category:Canadian musicians does not replace this list, as the content is diffused across a large number of subcategories. The category listings are not annotated. The "related changes" function, useful for keeping tabs on recent changes to a large number of Canadian music articles at once, does not work for categories. Members of WikiProject Canadian music keep watch of this list—note that it is on the to-do list there. When one of us writes a new article, it can be an effective way to alert other members of its presence so that other eyes may take a glance over. In contrast, something new appearing in a category does not show up on a watchlist. Keep. --Paul Erik 02:21, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. It's ironic that the main advantage lists have over categories (allowing users to add redlinks and help new articles to be created) is being prevented by editors of this list, who are removing any redlinks added. Delete it as redundant to the categories and against the whole idea of lists. Crazysuit 05:00, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Lists are not redundant with categories. They serve different purposes, and Wikipedia policy has always explicitly spelled out that a list is not deleted just because a category also exists — see Categories, lists, and series boxes, which explicitly states that lists and categories should be used in synergy, not in exclusion to each other. The category, further, is not comprehensive in the same way as the list is; Category:Canadian musicians contains only subcategories, not individual articles, and is thus navigable only if you already know what subcategories an article is in. If you only know the musician's name, the category is useless as a navigation system. (Don't believe me? Using only the category system — no going to the list or the search box — find Phil Nimmons in no more than three clicks. You'll only be able to do it if you already know exactly which three clicks will get you there. And if you already know that, you didn't need to look him up in the first place.) The deletion rationale is thus invalid; keep. Bearcat 06:57, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. Lists and categories supplement one another, and both are valuable tools.  SriMesh |  talk  02:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per The Transhumanist, Paul Erik, Bearcat et al. Regarding replacement with categories, the Wiki category navigation remains rather crude and primitive and will probably stay that way for a long time. Lists such as these remain essential as navigation and descriptive tools that are customisable. Dl2000 02:39, 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.