Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Top 100 DJ's (2005)


 * 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 keep. seresin | wasn't he just...? 04:00, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Top 100 DJ's (2005)
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Unencyclopedic listcruft. Fails WP:N. We already have articles on most of these people, where their poll ranking is noted. We also put the information (available at DJ Magazine's site anyway) at DJ Magazine (where it's also excessive, but I'm not proposing that for deletion at present). I would also suggest the 2006&'07 lists get deleted, and any further such lists User:Lonelysoulq happens to create. Biruitorul (talk) 00:02, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep Probably better in its own article than in DJ Magazine. Certainly not in both (or possibly either) place. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 21:08, 15 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep this could be presented better in some way but I'm unsure how. Commendable effort though and does present useful information. Perhaps, gulp, a massive sortable table of the DJs who have made the top 100 lists could be a solution, in that way the data would be sortable so that if I wanted to find the top DJs from Finland, for instance I could sort by that. Benji boi 02:07, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * delete - seems to fail WP:NOT on many levels. "Top" is an entirely subjective term. You could re-title the article as List of top 100 DJs according to DJ Magazine's 2005 poll, but then this list is nothing more than the re-cap of a list from a magazine. AllGloryToTheHypnotoad (talk) 18:21, 19 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually that magazine is the industry leader and their list is recognized as the definitive list for DJs that operate on a global level either in sales, appearances or both. Renaming might make sense but as long as the article is clear in the lede it should be clear enough to our readers. If another entity comes of prominence and starts a list then the issue could be revisited to reconcile or rename. Benji boi 01:02, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The article is very good, and seems to have no problems, theuser who made it can also go on and make the other Top 100 DJ's for the other years.No need to shoot this article down.Bye.Mertozoro (talk) 00:19, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This article is highly detailed and provides lots of information, it includes pictures and charts for example listig the DJ's.So don't delete it!!!Best Wishes!!74.14.101.65 (talk) 00:24, 20 March 2008 (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.