Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Vocaloid products


 * 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. WP:NPASR Mark Arsten (talk) 02:06, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

List of Vocaloid products

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

There is no encyclopedic reason to keep this list of products. Most of the entries aren't properly verified anyway, and whatever is actually relevant and properly vetted could find its way into the main article, Vocaloid, which at 116,000 bytes is so ridiculously bloated that a few bytes more or less won't matter. The article looks like a combination of fancruft and directory info, and there is no encyclopedic reason to keep it. Drmies (talk) 00:16, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep The article may need some work, but that's not a reason to delete the list. Vocaloid is, first and foremost, a singing synthesizing program, and there are many different iterations of the technology. Rather than bloat the main article, having a separate list makes sense, and besides, having a list of software is not prohibited, so I don't see why Vocaloid cannot have its own software list when there are so many different versions across a multitude of languages. I would also like to note that WP:MUST and WP:UNRELIABLE are not proper arguments. I also do not see how this article has anything to do with WP:DIRECTORY or WP:FANCRUFT. All of these are real-world products with real-world impact, the exact opposite of what fancruft is.--  十  八  05:30, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I might could accept this if there were reliable sources on this supposed real-world impact, besides Twitters and online communities. 140,000 bytes combined is a pretty good indication of cruftiness. Drmies (talk) 14:29, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Not all the sources on the main article nor this article are unreliable, even if many of them are. There are also the promotional events, including several live concerts, the latest of which had over 10,000 fans. And even if the main article was trimmed, this product list is already long, and will continue to grow even longer over time. And I suppose just going by length, then George Washington would be absolutely filled with cruft, hmm?--  十  八  20:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
 * His article has references that are, like, from books, you know. Plus, he was important. There's books about him. Drmies (talk) 01:32, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep I come back to this article very often and I find it very useful. Even the official Vocaloid website doesn't have a list like this (it excludes a lot of products). I wouldn't mind it to be merged into the main Vocaloid article, as long as it doesn't disappear. Benimation (talk) 13:18, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Software-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:49, 19 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 18:38, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

 
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Mark Arsten (talk) 15:09, 3 October 2013 (UTC)




 * Delete per WP:NOTDIR. The fact that this may be a useful list is no reason to keep it. You don't see articles like this for other operating systems because it makes no sense for it. Should have been a speedy as there's nothing notable about a list like this. Walter Görlitz (talk) 01:34, 9 October 2013 (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.