Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of bands beginning with the word "lemon"


 * 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. I was tempted to restart and semi-protect the AFD given the many apparent single-purpose accounts (and possibly sockpuppets) involved in this one, but disregarding those there is a clear consensus to delete. --Core desat  00:46, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

List of bands beginning with the word "lemon"

 * — (View AfD)

(contested PROD). List of stuff whose justification to avert being an arbitrary collection of info is decidedly original research. There was lengthy discussion on its talk page that seems to be a stalemate between deletion on policy grounds vs keep for primarily softer reasons. DMacks 23:42, 12 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete -- Longhair\talk 23:50, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I've already stated my reasons on the talk page of that article. - Mewtation 00:02, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete before we have lists of bands for every fruit and vegetable. This article is an excellent definition of trivia, which wikipedia is not. Agent 86 00:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep There is nothing inhrerently arbitrary about the list, it is a flaw in the current version of the page. Additionally, while the justification is decidedly original research, it is not a difficult thing to remedy. You can't expect a tree the minute you plant the seed. --68.184.14.73 00:08, 13 December 2006 (UTC) Note: 68.184.14.73 has been blocked for continued trolling
 * Keep I see nothing wrong with a list like this one, and I doubt this pushes us down a Slippery slope to more lists concerning other citruses in band names. Foxxinnia 00:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Foxxinnia (talk • contribs). — Foxxinnia (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Keep It's a helpful list, and I truly don't see how this list can be brought into question, considering how many "non-notable" lists there are. I voiced my appreciation for this list on the previous talk page.  Would the list be more acceptable if it was opened up to all bands/artists with "Lemon" anywhere in the name? AriasSerathe 00:25, 13 December 2006 (UTC) — AriasSerathe (talk&#32;• contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete indiscriminate and arbitrary list, with the fuzziest of justifications. From the intro Having "Lemon" at the beginning of a band name is a good way to suggest that the band is some way wacky or that they maybe couldn't think of a name for a while and so strapped two random words together. Either way, any band that begins with the word "lemon" is clearly off-kilter in some way and worth noting. Wikipedia is not for oddball theories concocted while sitting around the dorm common area at midnight. --Calton | Talk 00:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I have found numerous lists on Wikipedia that have little to no practical usefulness, e.g. - List of three-letter English words. This list is no worse. --genghisdani 01:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

In the previous talk page, DMacks states: "To find new and exciting music, that's completely not the role of WP at all." If that's the case, I fail to see the purpose of such lists as this one or this one. AriasSerathe 01:01, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Careful though, as someone else responded there, that might be a justification for removing this page and then moving on to remove those as well rather than keeping this one. DMacks 02:04, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * And? If the community decides one way or another, that's fine. Need I remind you that this page is a discussion, not a ballot? Unless this person is a total ass, they should be able to respect that other people may disagree with them. If the deletion of this list is decided upon, I can only hope for consistancy in the deletion of other articles. Jhalkompwdr 13:15, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Incredibly strong delete for the obvious reason that this is an indiscriminate collection of otherwise unrelated names. The list has zero encyclopedic content. -- Kicking222 01:07, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * WP:DAFT - emphasis on the "D". Note, BTW, that none of the bands listed begins with the word lemon. Their names all do, mind you... Grutness...wha?  01:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete Genghisdani is correct, this list is no worse than List of three-letter English words. Thank you for pointing this page out to me, it will also be marked for deletion soon. Djma12 01:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Denying internet-goers the ability to access this list would be like denying human beings the right to access a list about bands whose names begin with "lemon" on wikipedia. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.177.156.242 (talk)  — 75.177.156.242 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I find it curious that there are so many votes from users who have no other edit other than to vote on this page Djma12 02:17, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator --Arnzy (talk • contribs) 02:22, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Completely arbitrary. --Wafulz 03:42, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep The only reason to delete seems to be that no one would have thought to create it, and therefor there is no real reason to delete. When in doubt- keep Yoiu17 07:03, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete One of the most arbitrary and pointless lists I've seen on the AfD. On another note, I smell sockpuppets... --The Way 07:05, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep I see absolutely no reason to delete this list. Like many lists, it may not seem relevant at the moment, but soon, it'll be filled with many bands whose names begin with the word "lemon." I know that, if I were to create a band with my fellow musicians, I'd love to be able to see our name in lights someday...or, at least, on Wikipedia. --tasogare51
 * Comment Can't this be speedied? It's clearly deletable and the sockpuppets are everywhere. --The Way 07:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * There was an attempt at speedying it but a stalemate was reached. See the talk page. Nivi 11:09, 13 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Strong Delete - If this is kept, it would open the door for lists of bands beginning with any word in the dictionary, since there is nothing notable about bands starting with the word lemon. VegaDark 08:24, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy delete and salt the earth and then create a list of bands beginning with the words salt the earth. SkierRMH, 08:30, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strongest Possible Delete, Screw the Rules I Have Money I am shocked at how many sockpuppets are on standby to keep this crap. Danny Lilithborne 09:34, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - This list is a compilation of information, and lists topics which have already been deamed 'noteable' by Wikipedia's rules and regulations. It contains no origional research or biased material (neither of which is even possible in such a simple list) and deleting it would only start a new fad of going after any page of which the topic dosn't nessacarily serve a purpose for all users. Wikipedia should be able to serve the minorities as well as the whole group, as all this information is useful to someone, as has been proved by other equally obscure lists. -- 82.110.220.88 11:13, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - Yet more listcruft. A shame it couldn't be speedied. Squeezeweasel 11:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - I was actually looking for a band that had lemon in it, the lemonheads. I could not remember what there name was and whup! here's this list. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 76.16.149.153 (talk) 13:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC). — 76.16.149.153 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * Delete per WP:NOT. Prolog 14:37, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as WP:NOT an indiscriminate etc. etc. Yay, puppetfest! Sandstein 14:43, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, of course. Because this page isn't worse than a lot of other ones, as the above mentioned List of three-letter English words and many others. I can't see why there is this policy to remove everything, my opinion is that more pages are better. You find them useless? Don't read them. If even only one person finds this useful, it is worth to stay. 15:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)15:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep Expanding from the previous comment A better example of how this article is no worse than any others is list of one letter english words which is a list containg only 3 items and a collection of references that are obviously mentioned extensivly elsewhere on Wikipedia. This list has far better standing as a list and therefore if this has to go, then there are dozens, if not hundreds, of notably 'worse' lists to be found on Wiki. --81.132.60.96 15:35, 13 December 2006 (UTC) — 81.132.60.96 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Holy sockpuppets, Batman! Now that I've said it, let me also say this: a list article that has more edit links than entries in the list needs to be rethought even if the subject merits inclusion in Wikipedia. This is trivia about three levels below acceptability in Wikipedia since Wikipedia is not an indescriminate repository of information. Delete. B.Wind 17:59, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Speedy Delete I noticed this page yesterday, but didn't put it on my watch list because it had already been tagged and couldn't possibly last more than a few minutes. Imagine my surprise to see an AfD for it pop up on the recent changes list.  It's just random information that has no real value to offer anyone. --Onorem 18:53, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * But that's the thing. How can you claim that this information is not beneficial to anybody, and still maintain the thought that a list of one-, two-, or three-letter English words is?  How can you suggest that a list of musicians fitting into certain genres is more notable; that a list of video games beginning with the letter 'F' is more practical and useful than a list of bands containing the word "lemon"?  I've already discovered many new bands because of this list; it's rather ignorant to state that nobody benefits from such lists.  Now if you'd please quit making such empty claims and instead come up with actual support for your argument, perhaps a decision could finally be reached.  And to the rest of you, quit shouting "sockpuppetry!" like mindless peons.  It doesn't make you look intelligent or clever; just pretentious and clueless.  Just because there are multiple people speaking out about an issue that YOU find to be "daft" doesn't mean that they're all the same person. AriasSerathe 19:06, 13 December 2006 (UTC) — AriasSerathe (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * As stated before, the articles on 3 and 1 letter english words are also being tagged for deletion. Djma12 19:40, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I don't believe I ever stated that a list of 3 letter English words is useful...although some boggle and/or scrabble players may disagree. If you honestly believe that a list by genre is the same as a list of bands that start with "lemon.", I really have no desire to try to reason with you.  By the way, people wouldn't be crying sockpuppetry if there wasn't so much blatant sockpuppetry here. --Onorem 20:16, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * In addition, I seriously doubt that the admin who will close this AfD would appreciate the personal attacks by AriasSerathe above. I'm also sure that the trolling for votes that is mentioned on the article's talk page will also be taken into consideration. Please, let's keep it civil! B.Wind 23:44, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * It didn't seem to me as though AriasSerathe (who had some very good points) was attacking anyone. Arias was merely stating that the continual calling of "sockpuppets!" was getting repetitive, as it had already been stated many times before.  Arias was not attacking the people, only the people's actions. - Mewtation 01:23, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete - As lots of comments above, completely indiscriminate list of information. One of the worst examples of list articles (and I hate list articles!) I've seen. One of the entries (The Lemonheads) doesn't even start with the word "Lemon". - fchd 20:48, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Uh, "The Lemonheads" DOES start with the word Lemon. Words like "the" and "a" are removed from the beginning of a title when it comes to classifications.  Let me guess, you look in the T section of an encyclopedia when looking for "The U.S. Civil War", or the T section of a rental store for "The Legend of Zelda"? 72.201.77.164 21:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Uh, no it doesn't. It begins with the word "Lemonheads". The band is not called The Lemon Heads. It's like saying that The Mothers Of Invention start with the word "Moth". Grutness...wha?  05:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete per WP:NOT. -- Satori Son 22:11, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Kill it with fire. Corporal 23:50, 13 December 2006 (UTC)
 * This article makes Baby Jesus cry. I find it humorous that this debate is even occuring. --Guess Who 04:39, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I, as a devout Catholic, am strongly offended by this blasphemous comment. --81.132.60.96 07:49, 14 December 2006 (UTC) — 81.132.60.96 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
 * I'm a devout Christian, and I found the statement likely. Patstuarttalk 16:29, 18 December 2006 (UTC)


 * strong delete Not encyclopedic, and not even necessary, since search engines exist, and anyone who wants this information --or any similar information--can easily get it. I do not know the basis for the energy being expended.DGG 06:53, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete It is essentially useless given that several unsourced bands with no wikipedia articles are also included in the list (they link to blank pages). These are bands whose notability and very existence cannot be verified. Essentially this makes the list wholly personally research. At a basic level, the article does not assert anything notable about bands whose name begins with "lemon". Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information.--Eqdoktor 07:33, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * yes it is —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 68.184.14.73 (talk)
 * an indiscriminate collection of information i mean --68.184.14.73 18:21, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
 * And we trust an anonymous user over a Wikipedia policy page because? Danny Lilithborne 22:00, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * You win. Obviously I only created the article to see what would happen. I'm surpristed it has lasted as long as it has. Delete it now if you want to. I do, however, hope that it takes down many of the other stupid lists that plague Wikipedia with it. Jhalkompwdr 20:09, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete post haste. This. is. stupid. Almost nil encyclopedic content. Also not something an average person would probably search for. Ever. Maybe if the list had over a hundred entries, but it doesn't, so delete. 'Nuff said. - t3h real adam d. 03:52, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. While I agree the page is, in its current state, somewhat silly, I question then why the word Next has its own article. Then there's the endless amount of lists on wikipedia, including a List of lists. Where is the line drawn? While some of them are on very notable things, then there is a List of band names with date references, a List of Pink Floyd trivia which is band specific, and there's the List of literary characters with nine fingers. I'm curious what line differs this from them. --Metal Man88 10:22, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * The Next list is helpful, in the case that someone is looking for NeXT the computer company and doesn't know how it's spelled, or N. EX. T the korean rock band. That page serves to help guide people who do ambiguous searches. The List of Topics is helpful in obviously finding articles related to a subject. However, the list of bands with date references could and probably should be deleted, and the Pink Floyd trivia page should probably be merged with the Pink Floyd entry. - t3h real adam d. 18:03, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Lemon. Lemon lemon lemon lemon, lemon lemon lemon lemon lemon lemon lemon... lemon lemon, lemon lemon lemon ! --Xkeeper 10:24, 16 December 2006 (UTC) (P.S.: DELETE)
 * Delete stupid. bogdan 10:55, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * (Personal attack removed) 68.184.14.73 11:05, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Petition accepted per bogdan. - Francis Tyers · 11:37, 16 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per Eqdoktor and others, and WP:NOT, Delta Tango • Talk 02:30, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete If this AfD fails then we've truly opened the gates to the orchard. Orpheus 11:39, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete what next, bands beginning with 'The'?--Sandy Scott 21:06, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete With Extreme and Violent Prejudice, For Hell's Sake Do I even have to justify this vote? How about this: let's extrapolate. If one were to allow a "List of bands beginning with the word 'lemon,' " one would obviously also have to allow a "List of bands beginning with the word 'orange,' " and the word "apple," and so on. Then, one could argue that vegetables should also be allowed - then all plants. ("List of bands beginning with the word cedar"). Then someone would argue for lists of bands starting with any living thing, and then of course, inevitably, some industrious individual argues for inclusion of all "Lists of bands beginning with the word X." What with the vast number of words in the Shorter Oxford English Dictionary, let alone the Oxford English Dictionary, (at last count, over 300,000), this is clearly a fool's goal. Allowing this article to remain opens the floodgates for 300,000 more. &spades; P  M  C  &spades; 11:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh my gosh what the heck delete - per all of above. The obvious sockpuppetry for such a quick article is horribly puzzling. Is this listed on a website somewhere? -Patstuarttalk 16:29, 18 December 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.