Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Hot 100 number-one singles of the 2010s (U.S.) (2nd nomination)


 * 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. Listing all three on WP:DRV for the purposes of common treatment. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 04:48, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

List of Hot 100 number-one singles of the 2010s (U.S.)
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log )

Delete. The 2010s list was previously nominated for discussion in November 2011 and was kept. List of Hot 100 number-one singles of the 2000s (U.S.) was created afterwards and nominated for AfD and was deleted in December 2011. This nomination is to hopefully get a clear consensus on having both individual year articles and by decade articles that basically provide the same information from the same sources, except over one page vs. 10 pages. The individual lists are consise and provide nice introductions and summaries for each year. The decade lists also provides some statistics which could mean more by being merged into List of Billboard Hot 100 chart achievements and milestones, if appropriate and space allows. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars (talk) 02:34, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete - I still feel this is all repeated information and unnecessary. - eo (talk) 11:52, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:35, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  • Gene93k (talk) 18:35, 10 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Keep Meets most of the qualifications for WP:LIST. TheCuriousGnome (talk) 03:02, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - Per my !vote in the last AfD, the list seems appropriate I still no reason to delete. Rlendog (talk) 03:20, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep - It's no redundant information, it's clearer information. I see no reasons why should be deleted. --HC 5555 (talk) 10:27, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment - if consensus here is to keep then I propose that the already-deleted 2000s list be recreated. It makes no sense to have a gap in what is obviously a series of articles.  Either keep all or delete all. - eo (talk) 13:48, 17 January 2012 (UTC)
 * delete There is no reason to repeat the information in multiple ways. wikipedia is not a list of statistics, and is certainly not multiple lists of statistics of the same information. The music project should set up a standard, which should be followed
 * 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.