Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of black metal bands


 * 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 to delete. Davewild (talk) 21:48, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

List of black metal bands

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

There's no need for this list when Category:Black metal musical groups and it's many nationality-associated subcats exist. Funeral 16:26, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete No beneficial information beyond what a category can provide. -Verdatum (talk) 17:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Needless duplication of cat. - Dumelow (talk) 18:11, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. We Americans can be very race-conscious, but sometimes we take it too far.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 19:05, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Are you serious? I think you need to read black metal. Kameejl (Talk) 08:59, 6 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - I think lists are useful and are capable of more than categories. This list could be worked with even more, but just because categories are easier to maintain and what not, that doesn't make them better.  Plus if a regular person if looking for lists of x-type bands, they would not only find the lists more appealing than categories, but would probably find the list before they found the category.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Navnløs (talk • contribs) 19:09, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Basically the same reply I gave on the doom metal AfD: Not necessarily, only 6 articles link to the list, whereas there are hundreds of band pages with the cat. Funeral 19:16, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Hammer1980 ·talk 19:24, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep, useful and more informative listing. A list offers so much more options than a simple category could ever provide. While a category is good simply for listing them, list articles go several steps further and offer different ways they can be listed. Some examples are on the very page that was afd'd and a few on some other lists, they are: adding their location by flag, if they are/were one of the original bands of the genre they will be indicated, if they played the style early, mid or later on, a list of albums by the bands that are within the genre and also not in the genre but has made a notable release of the genre and also bands that at some point in time played the style. --CircafuciX (talk) 19:35, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Category:Dutch black metal musical groups, Category:French black metal musical groups, Category:Swiss black metal musical groups - That's how I tell what a band's location is. Not a misleading picture of a flag. Lists are worthless and redundant no matter how pretty you make them look. Funeral 19:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: Categories are not a substitute for lists per se. Navigation in categories such as this one is not intuitive as bands are divided by country. No overview is possible using this category system. The system now used is disabling other kinds of categorization f.e. including subgenres (like done on the gothic metal band list). Something possible in article lists. Lists are the logical result of genre articles as they are an extension of "key artist" sections. It's better to have a separate list because there are too many notable bands to be in the genre article. Articles are more flexible and capable of more than categories. Flags/country names will give the reader an immediate visual indication of different metal scenes. Some bands change their genre over time so it can be useful to have extra information like "first album" or "early" next to a band name. The list must however contain sources so it needs some work. Categories are not a substitute for lists. Kameejl (Talk) 09:04, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Question/Comment You said, "The system now used is disabling other kinds of categorization f.e. including subgenres (like done on the gothic metal band list). Something possible in article lists." Forgive me but I don't understand this sentence at all. Could you please clarify?  Moreover, isn't Black metal in itself a subgenre? Finally, if a user is interested in learning about the "different metal scenes", would that not be better reflected by discussing the different metal scenes in the main black metal article?  To me, at least, that sounds a good deal easier than performing shape recognition on the various flag images to mentally calculate the distrobution of artists by nation.-Verdatum (talk) 09:06, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete content covered perfectly well by a category. Fair Deal (talk) 14:01, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep per Kameejl. ~ | twsx | talkcont | 07:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete-use a category. Peter Fleet (talk) 09:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Strong Keep Helpful list. I agree with the above "Keep" requests. If you delete this list, there are many other lists of other genres out there too.Metal Head (talk) 15:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * delete 208.38.80.45 (talk) 15:24, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep From what I've heard, most Wikipedia readers tend to find these list articles more user-friendly than categories i.e. many readers are more likely to check these lists than categories. All this list need is sources and it's fine.--Azure Shrieker (talk) 15:36, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep: Lists can be more useful than categories. Bloodredchaos (talk) 17:12, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep: If you say that the List of black metal bands is not going to be developed further, then I would have said delete. As of now, the category is much better than the list; its concise, bands are grouped into country-wise subcategories. But, the category will stay that way. On the other hand, the list can be developed along the lines of some of these lists Category:Lists. They can convey band specific information, which I doubt can be integrated into a category. Of course work needs to be done; but also, there are no featured categories, right? Weltanschaunng 03:08, 9 December 2007 (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.