Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of best-selling music artists (50 million to 69 million records)


 * 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   merge to List of best-selling music artists.  MBisanz  talk 17:48, 12 December 2012 (UTC)

List of best-selling music artists (50 million to 69 million records)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

The title of the article violates TITLEFORMAT as there already is an article named List of best-selling music artists. Also, the sections 50 million to 69 million records was trimmed based on consensus about two months ago due its large size.--Harout72 (talk) 00:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete. A bottom threshold has to be set. We would all agree that a list of every artist that sold a million records would be ridiculously oversize, and that list of every artist that had sold 500 million would be excessively rarified. Based on the article size, it would appear that the agreement to set the threshold at 70 million is in the right ballpark. I don't think the argument based on title formatting even begins to be persuasive, though.&mdash;Kww(talk) 00:05, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Articles for deletion/Log/2012 December 5.  Snotbot   t &bull; c &raquo;  00:11, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep or Merge into main article of List of best-selling music artists. Generally, the title of the article not violates TITLEFORMAT. Also, there was no clear consensus to remove content from Wikipedia (Trimming), but only to reduce the size of the main article. Not counting the author's opinion, user Gabe19 - did not specify how, Jax 0677 support splitting, Bluesatellite and Krystaleen support trimming. This is not clear consensus. Sorry, Harout72; your big changes have been made after two days of discussion and between only four users. Too fast. Please give more time for discussion rather than 2 days and quickly change. Should be more opinions from more users. PS. According to dates, has only been two weeks, not months... so you can safely and calmly continue the discussion. Subtropical-man (talk) 00:12, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * there was no clear consensus.. and where is the consensus to split and create this new page? You even didn't care to discuss it first with editors who are more familiar with the topic for years. Bluesatellite (talk) 02:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Delete/Merge into List of best-selling music artists - Without delving too deeply into it, this appears to be a fork, or a continuation of List of best-selling music artists. How deep do we really need this list to go? The generic article isn't all that long, and with some reference formatting could be a manageable size. I'm really unsatisfied with the random branching, not to mention incredibly awkward titling. Having lists like this is fine, but I don't see any need for it to be branched out like this. And we need to establish some lower limit on the best selling artist criteria. At least when they're on the same page they're easy to reorganize (and certainly that reorganization will need to happen frequently). Shadowjams (talk) 00:42, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. Yes, Merge back into List of best-selling music artists is good concept, I also support this. Subtropical-man (talk) 00:53, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Purely technical note "Merge" and "Delete" are effectively the same thing in this instance, because the article was split. There's no history or content to preserve.&mdash;Kww(talk) 00:57, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, but merge means undo new controversy changes, thus is a good solution of the problem. This data there should be, in main article of List of best-selling music artists or separate article. If there is not a separate article, to merge back into main article. Subtropical-man (talk) 01:06, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * The only option here is either "keep" or "delete". This problem started due to the super-large size of the article, so "Merge" is not and will never be a good solution. Bluesatellite (talk) 02:30, 5 December 2012 (UTC)


 * DELETE, per previous discussion, and No merging per WP:SIZE. Bluesatellite (talk) 02:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, per Bluesatellite, Harout72, and previous discussions. What's the point of the page? There are only a few artists listed on the page and it's largely unnecessary. —  Gabe 19  ( talk contribs) 03:00, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Divide. Instead of deleting them, why not divide the who;e article into two pages, page 1 with artists selling 100 million records and beyond and page 2 with artists selling 50 to 99 million records??? Many artists from the list are only popular in selected countries only (think of Hikaru Utada, Ayumi Hamasaki and B'z) and to delete them would definitely this article not show to the public the rapid changes in the industry. So I suggest we divide and not delete. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 112.202.135.161 (talk) 03:22, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Divide.Some artists are significantly relevant for music industry, especially for their own genres that may not be as popular as the listed on higher figures. Such as Nat King Cole, The Monkees and Ayumi Hamasaki. They should be there at least. --196.40.10.134 (talk) 05:48, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Comment. I understand that divide = keep. Subtropical-man (talk) 11:46, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete we have to draw a line somewhere. (and who would ever search for such a term?) --Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 21:35, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete per consensus and WP:SIZE precluding a merge. - Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 22:20, 5 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Split apart "List of best-selling music artists" and keep this article or delete "List of best-selling music artists" and this article - If "WP:SIZE" is an issue, then we need to split "List of best-selling music artists" into several articles. The goal of Wikimedia is to expand on the sum of human knowledge, which is why we should keep this article.  If we do not keep this article, why should "List of best-selling music artists" be kept?--Jax 0677 (talk) 18:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Dividing up the list in this way seems reasonable, but i agree there would be many ways to do so. It makes sense to separate the most famous from the merely notable, and for a subject this large, perhaps an intermediate group makes sense also. But the content is relevant, making it into a list arranged by number sold is relevant and encyclopedic. Trying to figure out the divisions at the AfD for a particular one of these is not the productive way to handle it. I see no reason why there should not be similar lists by major genres as well, not instead of--we're not paper, and can do our lists in whatever ways are helpful. The general question of what size article is appropriate for the wide range of devices and transmission speeds WP users employ is a much harder question--the range is so much greater than it was 10 years ago. If anything, that range is a reason for doing large lists both as single lists and as split lists, because there's no longer a universal size.  DGG ( talk ) 06:31, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Doing it by genre or country would be a nightmare, DGG. We already have genre-warriors that insist on constantly edit-warring the genre of individual songs based on things like a review saying something like "reggae-tinged", which some interpret as being enough to cause a song to become "reggae" and others do not. The prospect of artists being constantly removed and added from dozens of lists based on individual editors arguing about whether they are a crunk/glitch hop artist or merely a southern hip-hop artist makes me cringe.&mdash;Kww(talk) 15:59, 9 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 8 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 23:08, 8 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment: To above editor and IPs, please note that it is "List of best-selling music artists", not "List of record sales by notable music artists". To be a notable musician does not have to be one of best-selling artist. Janis Joplin is a legend in blues music, but she's not a huge records seller. As for artists who are only popular in certain countries, like Ayumi Hamasaki or Utada Hikaru, then you should include them on the best-selling list of their respective countries (in this case List of best-selling music artists in Japan). Bluesatellite (talk) 11:23, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Delete, not merge - I agree with Blue above me. This should not be merged, but deleted. The original page this was taken from is already far too long and detailed, therefore there is no reason to create its own page. In fact, when I think of "list of best-selling artists", I picture the select 10-30 artists who've sold as much, not a list with 200 names. And no, merging and deleting are not the same thing. Merging would mean we re-add this portion to the parent article.-- CallMe Nathan  &bull;  Talk2Me   19:37, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * My point in making that comment is that even if someone closes this as a "merge" (which I don't advise), there would be no need to keep this title as a redirect or to retain its history. All the history is already in the parent.&mdash;Kww(talk) 19:54, 9 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep, as above. Merge is also a good brainchild. Franek K. (talk) 20:05, 9 December 2012 (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.