Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of doo-wop songs


 * 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 keep.  Ρх₥α 02:38, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

List of doo-wop songs

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

An unmaintainable list. List of doo wop musicians sufficiently covers the topic; we don't need a list of every doo wop song written, just like there are no List of rock songs or List of hip hop songs articles. 17Drew 01:29, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Because of the musicians list that we already have. No reason for both; list of musicians, and list of songs (by the same musicians on the first list). - Rjd0060 05:24, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Weak Ke-ke-ke-ke-keep sha-na-na-na. I'm familiar with many of the songs on the list and they seem to be notable ones, so it serves to point out which ones lack articles. It's not unmaintainable - new doo-wop songs are rather rare. It should probably be trimmed a bit though. Clarityfiend 06:09, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete (redirect to List of doo wop musicians?) as it is an 'inverted' list of the same - just need to list the song with its musician. SkierRMH 06:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * But the same (specious, IMO) reason for deletion could be offered for that list, too. Then what? Jeh 23:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm guessing that there's already a consensus to have lists of musicians by genre since artists often make significant impacts on genres on a genre, unlike individual songs such as album tracks. 17Drew 20:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep: Perhaps repurpose to "significant doo-wop songs" (as defined by their being mentioned in other references, such as John Javna's book, or covered multiple times) and trim it back. Jeh 23:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Categorify Seems like a viable category.  Useless as an article.  &mdash;   Music  Maker  5376  21:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - this is a very useful article, and there are hundreds more structured just like it on a wide variety of subjects. The redlinks alone make this list worth keeping, as cateogories are incapable of displaying redlinks.  See: Red link.  This nomination should not be an issue of categories vs. lists, as the two overlap in very positive and synergistic ways.  To favor one over the other is counterproductive, as there are users who prefer to build categories and there are users who prefer to build lists.  The two camps leapfrog each other.  Lists have many advantages over categories, but the two working in concert as a whole is greater than the sum of the two parts.   Th e Tr ans hu man ist    02:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, W.marsh 14:04, 26 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete To many red links and no real way to source this list. The notable songs have articles, so this seems like a clear case of a subject that is better served by category.Ridernyc 14:40, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - this is a list of topics, and not a list of articles. Therefore, the existence of redlinks is not a consideration for deletion.  Redlinks are to be encouraged, not discouraged, as they are useful indicators and present opportunities for the expansion of Wikipedia's coverage.  Please see Red link for more information.  Th e Tr ans hu man ist    02:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - Drew, please explain in explicit detail how this list is unmaintainable.  We're managing to maintain Wikipedia, which has over 2,000,000 articles.  So I'm very interested to learn how this list of topics, which is tiny in comparison, eludes maintainability in your opinion.  Which acts of maintenance are impossible on this list, and how are they so?  Th e Tr ans hu man ist    02:18, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Because this is nothing near a complete list of all doo-wop songs. Were it close to complete, it'd essentially be a huge catalog of songs, with too many entries to perform any sort of maintenance task.  That's why Category:Doo-wop songs is far preferrable, and part of why all other genres only use a category and not a list.  17Drew 23:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - who is to say that the list of musicians covers this topic sufficiently for the whole World's population? How do you know that there aren't users who would would like to browse songs by song title, rather than by the composer's name?  All the libraries I've visited list their books by author, by title, and by subject.  So the creator of this list was in no way out of line or off base.  The list serves a standard referencing purpose, and adds value over categories by including further details in annotations, and also due to the fact that building lists is far more efficient than building categories. (Categories are decentralized and awkward to build, and they are not subject to feature expansion as lists are, such as formatting, subheadings, annotations, lead sections, etc.).  This list is also useful for tracking coverage of this subject (via redlinks), and also serves as a task list for those interested in writing articles about notable doo-wop songs.  That Wikipedia lacks lists on other genres of songs is not a compelling argument for deletion of this list, as it simply means no one has gotten around to making decent lists for those genres yet.  Deficiency in one area is a poor argument for extending that deficiency to other areas.  All the reasons given by the nominator for deletion are invalid.  Th e Tr ans hu man ist    02:58, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Re: "This list is also useful for tracking coverage of this subject (via redlinks), and also serves as a task list for those interested in writing articles about notable doo-wop songs." Perhaps editors interested in articles about doo-wop songs could form a WikiProject on the topic, then move this list from the mainspace to their subspace. Thus the list is easily accessible by those whom it would best serve, but not to the general reader who would neither care about nor have the ability to remove the redlinks. Just a suggestion. JFlav 18:50, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * If people want a database of all doo-wop songs, then they should be using a database, not an encyclopedia. Task lists do not go in the article space; they belong in either someone's user space or in the project space.  That there aren't lists of songs for other (more notable) genres doesn't imply that information about those genres is underdeveloped; it indicates that those genres, many of which receive more attention, do not have a consensus that this sort of list is appropriate for Wikipedia.  17Drew 00:00, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * weak keep I'd suggest transwiki if there was somewhere move it to. Lists like this are useful to people who don't know the material. Barry Mann has a song in the list, but isn't in the list of musicians. I'll leave to somebody else to decided whether or not Who Put the Bomp (song) - Barry Mann belongs on the list jonathon 03:36, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Some might find this WP:USEFUL, but that's what we have categories for.   Bur nt sau ce  20:39, 29 October 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.