Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of eponymous albums


 * 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 Delete. —Quarl (talk) 2007-04-26 07:20Z

List of eponymous albums

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Listcruft; not maintainable, no obvious point. Discussion as Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums includes the suggestion that it be transferred to a category, but the original category was deleted, and there seems no point resurrecting it. Mel Etitis ( Talk ) 11:56, 15 April 2007 (UTC) 
 * Weak Delete - seems arbitrary, and i can't imagine a use for it. the_undertow talk  23:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep How would it be "not maintainable". --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 01:03, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Because, to be complete, it would be vast &mdash; the only reason it isn't is that there's a deep bias for a certain type of music from a certain region built into it. Moreover, it's going to continue growing... --Mel Etitis  ( Talk ) 10:36, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Lists of Presidents and Popes is going to grow too, should we delete them? --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 03:22, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Useful list, would be category clutter, but a single article is no harm. Carlossuarez46 03:47, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. WP:NOT Articless are not lists of loosely associated topics. The only thing that connects these albums is a trivial, coincidental connection with the titles. Not exactly significant. Interesting trivia, not encyclopedic. Crazysuit 05:12, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as unmaintainable and redundant list. — JyriL talk 23:51, 17 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as collection of loosely associated items. To those who said keep: "useful" and "no harm" are not valid grounds for keeping. Punkmorten 21:22, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Personally, as a music fan, I find it interesting. Wiki is not paper, and this is the type of list which serves as a valid extension of the article Eponymous while not cluttering that or other music related albums.  In fact, that article lists many types of Eponymous lists, including List of eponymous diseases, List of eponymous medical signs, etc.  Oddly enough, this listing isn't on the page, so I will be adding that.  As someone who views Wikipedia as a way of serving the music community through informative, extensive articles, I fail to see the justification for deleting such an article. --Ataricodfish 03:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
 * &emsp; Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached  &emsp; Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ··· 日本穣 ? · Talk to Nihon joe 02:40, 22 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Sr13 (T|C) 03:04, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. How is it possibly useful? It'll never be complete or updated. Indeed, it's very arbitrary. -- Mikeblas 03:48, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as indiscriminate list and directory of albums with nothing in common other than the coincidence of being named after the recording artist. Otto4711 06:52, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletions.  -- Pax:Vobiscum 07:19, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a good example of stuff that is true but holds no encyclopedic value ("That something is 100% true does not automatically mean it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia" WP:NOT). Pax:Vobiscum 08:42, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Pointless. And for some reason manages not only to leave out Faust but misses both the albums that Jerry Garcia released called Garcia. BTLizard 13:05, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. No Boingo ?  What good is a pointless list of albums if it doesn't include Boingo?  Useless. Captain Infinity 20:28, 25 April 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.