Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of doom 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. Those working on this list might want to consider adding some brief information about the bands listed so that it goes beyond what the category provides - at the moment the only extra info related to the bands' nationalities. WjBscribe 16:30, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

List of doom metal bands

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

The list has no refs and it's content is already in Category:Doom metal musical groups. Funeral 00:13, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete - WP:CATEGORY's do a better job than redundant lists. Scar ian  Talk  09:33, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep. While it needs referencing, it already shows their nationality which categories don't do as well. Capitalistroadster (talk) 09:43, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Valuable list Pensil (talk) 13:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Why is it valuable? It's worthless - cats are better and easier to maintain than lists. And why is showing nationality important? Funeral 16:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete Would be much better served as category. Take for example Rock Groups, it has its own category and can even be broken down further (nationality or genre). That is what needs to happen here. This article is completely unsourced and impossible to maintain as well. -- Cyrus      Andiron   17:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Duplicates an existing category. Seal Clubber (talk) 18:08, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep - I think lists are useful and are capable of more than categories. This list definitely needs some work, 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.  Blizzard Beast  ''$ODIN' 18:42, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Not necessarily, only 6 articles link to the list, whereas there are 175 band pages with the cat. Funeral 18:46, 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) 19:17, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment Perhaps you'd like to format those refs properly. Funeral 19:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin: User:Navnløs and User:CircafuciX have been discussing deletions such as this one in breach of WP:CANVAS. Recommend that their !votes be met with some scepticism. Scar ian  Talk  20:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Note to closing admin: This is a lie or mistake, we did not break WP:CANVAS. We both agreed we wanted the lists and talked about how we would go about trying to have them kept. We weren't coercing each other or others of anything.  Blizzard Beast  ''$ODIN' 19:09, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: Categories are not a substitute for lists per se. 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) 09:06, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete content covered perfectly well by a category. Fair Deal (talk) 14:03, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep: Lists can be used much more effectively than categories. Bloodredchaos (talk) 22:02, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete-use a category. Peter Fleet (talk) 09:45, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Has fair amount of sources and is useful. Many Wikipedia readers are more likely to check these lists than categories anyway. This list is more informative and user-friendly than categories since you can see the bands' location and check them on AMG.--Azure Shrieker (talk) 15:42, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep There's many lists like that on Wikipedia. Also, I think there's no need for so much sources. Nothingagainst (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 19:45, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment - "There's many lists like this" isn't a valid reason. Some of those lists are being deleted:   And every page needs sources, that's how this website works. Funeral 19:49, 8 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.