Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of albums which include 20 or more tracks


 * 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 of the debate was DELETE. Rje 12:10, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

List of albums which include 20 or more tracks
Listcruft with little or no encyclopedic value. cholmes75 20:08, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete. Practically infinite, with no clear value.--Esprit15d 20:49, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete: more useless listcruft. --Hetar 20:50, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep perfectly encyclopedic list. No reason why this one is worse than the other lists is provided.  Grue   20:53, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * That is not a reason to keep this, it's a reason to delete the worse lists. Stifle (talk) 14:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong delete It's worse because it has no use whatsoever. Even a list as ludicrous as "List of songs that are longer than 15 minutes" could theoretically have some use, such as "Man, I love me some epic songs, but I don't know where to find them." What could this list give you? "Man, I love me some... albums with a lot of tracks." Um, no. This is listcruft at its finest. -- Kicking222 23:06, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Esprit15d. If there is actually any value in tracking albums by track count, then perhaps it could be accomplished better by categories. -- Zawersh 08:31, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Or also create List of albums which include 17 or more tracks, List of albums which include 23 or more tracks, since 20 is not a Magic Number. -- GWO
 * From the article you linked to, "The seven known magic numbers as of 2005 are: 2, 8, 20, 28, 50, 82, 126." Cedars 13:30, 18 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete as arbitrary list with arbitrary standards for inclusion, unlikely to ever be completed, apparently created solely for the sake of having such a list, i.e. listcruft. Stifle (talk) 14:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unmaintainable. 23skidoo 15:25, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete unmaintainable. ergot 15:26, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Grue. Well-maintained list that covers a frequently discussed aspect of recordings. I remember when some of these albums were released how the reviews emphasized the exceptional number of tracks. Wikipedia is well within its encyclopedic role when it gives the exact track number for people who need the info. -- JJay 18:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep per Grue/JJay Spearhead 21:05, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as unencyclopedic. Most things that start with "List of" are not encyclopedia articles.  Trivia for the sake of trivia is not helpful to the project.  Friday (talk) 21:15, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Unmaintainable listcruft. Zaxem 12:27, 22 May 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.