Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of albums which do not contain their title track


 * 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. Mailer Diablo 08:53, 1 August 2006 (UTC)

List of albums which do not contain their title track
A Nintendude-esque listcruft article, in the vein of "Albums with three words in their name." This list doesn't illustrate any topic; it's just a list of things that coincidentally share an attribute.

This was prodded and prod2'ed, but the prod was removed by the article creator with the uninformative comment "protest." - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. I'm not a fan of lists that do not serve the purpose of elucidating on an existing article. WP:NOT for indiscriminate information or trivia. Agent 86 01:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete The list does nothing to help my understanding of albums. It might help you in a random bet from a friend, but is not helpful for an encyclopedia Mikeeilbacher 01:50, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Crabapplecove 02:10, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: Honestly, it's a bar bet trivia list that can never be complete and hardly be verified.  I'm sure it's fun to think of these things, but it's not really useful to read them.  Geogre 02:23, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete:completely irrelevant--Musaabdulrashid 02:34, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, useless and indiscriminate list. --Core des at talk. o.o;; 02:54, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete WP is not a way to settle a bar bet with your buddies. &mdash; MrDolomite | Talk 03:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. -- Gogo Dodo 04:03, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, this has no serious use or cross-reference purpose. --Dhartung | Talk 04:40, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. It's just trivia. GassyGuy 06:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, I did create this article, and this comment probably won't save it, but this article is a little different from many pieces of cruft that are listed here. It is extraordinarily rare for an album to share the name of a track not on the album but released by the same band - the fact that there are only about 50 here is some indication of that (this is not a list that will grow out of hand such as some of the existing and apparently accepted song list articles). In many cases, there are reasons behind the lack of title track which give insights into the albums, the tracks, or the band/artist in question. These reasons can be (and in several cases are) indicated on this list. I realise I'm biased (as I have found this list useful on several occasions since I started it for my radio work), but I still vote keep. Grutness...wha?  07:48, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * If it's so rare, then why are there already over 50 entries on the list? The earliest date on the list is 1967 which means that, according to this list, it happens once or twice every year. That doesn't sound rare to me. Delete - CheNuevara 10:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * How many albums are released in a year? Hundreds? Thousands? Two divided by that number = rare. Grutness...wha?  00:21, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: The name of the article is problematic, Grutness.  Elvis Costello, for example, released an album called Almost Blue.  It was a record of covers, so he didn't put his original song, "Almost Blue," on it.  That song appeared on his next record, Imperial Bedroom.  However, "title track" is inappropriate in the first case, and the name of the article indicates that any album that doesn't have a title track is implied.  Perhaps the list, in paragraph form, can be in a title track article.  Geogre 11:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom --Bomkia 08:01, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep I am strongly opposed to List of X that happens to have some random and unreleated feature Y associated with it eg bands with colours in their names, or places named after rock formations. I typically recommend delete on articles that look like that.  However, Grutness's comments are persuasive as I believe there is encyclopedic value in a List of X that share notable encyclopedic similarity Y - an example that occurred to me was List of professional athletes that have held political office.  I'm persuaded that this list falls into the latter of my categories but I'm only weakly persuaded as I share the generic concerns here. MLA 09:19, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: Sorry, but I have to agree with everyone else... --Skully Collins Review Me! Please? 09:53, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. If nothing else, the article title is inherently problematic and meaningless. If a track is not on an album, then it is not that album's "title track". It's just a track that happens to share the same title. That said, it's not the worst example of this kind of list I've ever seen, so I'd hesitate to outright condemn it - hence no vote either way from me. Seb Patrick 10:22, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, listcruft. Punkmorten 14:21, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak Delete, I hope this list is hosted somewhere, but I suppose it doesn't belong here, per WP:NOT. -- H·G (words/works) 17:11, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Way too broad a scope. 23skidoo 18:59, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. And what about the List of albums which include 9 or fewer tracks?al 19:06, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. ---Charles 21:29, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Weak delete per nom, with the caveat that MLA's thinking, including in the extent to which it incorporates by reference that of Grutness, closely tracks with mine but that we dispose of the subordinate question a bit differently. Joe 23:38, 27 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment.When you know the song 'x' and see 'x' on the cover, you expect it to be in the album, don't you? One may find useful an article on 'Misnamed albums'. There are more silly things among the 56 items in the category [Lists of Albums], e.g. List of album covers containing nudity or List of albums with particularly long titles. 195.96.229.95 08:29, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. It is OR anyway - if there has actually been a study of this, a citation is needed. -- Aguerriero  ( talk ) 21:02, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. --Guinnog 21:04, 28 July 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is just too niche even for us. rootology 06:15, 29 July 2006 (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.