Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of discographies


 * 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. Mo0 [ talk ] 09:44, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

List of discographies
A textbook example of a truly pointless list. Who would read it? Why? It serves absolutely no purpose that could not be served by the already existing Category:Discographies and, if necessary, some new subcategories. And, let's not forget, a discography is a list of records so what we have here is a "a list of lists of records that are also in a category". Delete. kingboyk 18:56, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. I think kingboyk's nomination is rather funny. Props to him for the find. Isopropyl 19:21, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. From WP:NOT, see # 7 Not a directory; which  includes not a directory of discography sites. &mdash;ERcheck @ 21:24, 26 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep the subject matter must be notable else we wouldnt have the category, and lists serve a different purpose. Jcuk 00:22, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information nor a directory. --Ter e nce Ong 03:03, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. This is what we have categories for.    Proto    ||    type    10:10, 27 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Useful list for people who want to know what discographies we have organized by type of music. Hence it goes way beyond a category. It also does not violate any policies. Deleting this serves no coherent organizational purpose for this site. -- JJay 07:48, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * Subcategories. The entries in List_of_discographies, for example, would go nicely into Category:Discographies for record labels, which would itself be added to Category:Discographies. When/if we have thousands of discography articles it will make organisation and navigation much easier, trust me :) --kingboyk 12:28, 28 February 2006 (UTC)
 * When/if we have thousands of discography articles subcategories may be a solution. Until such time, though, the list is a a far more convenient way of organizing our coverage. It provides an immediate categorized overview of the lists. It should obviously be kept. -- JJay 12:33, 28 February 2006 (UTC)


 * very obvious delete. This is what categories are for. Friday (talk) 14:49, 28 February 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.