Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of famous recording studios


 * 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. It seems that people are concerned that the word "famous" is more-or-less inherenty problematic and are not persuade from that view. (One person was persuaded to it.) If bean-counting, note that Tombride finished up as a deleter. -Splash talk 17:11, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

List of famous recording studios
Original work and highly subjective. Nice page but unfortunately is not appropriate for Wikipedia. Consider placing it on a personal site. Cleanr 04:39, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per my nom. Cleanr 16:02, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep, but wikify a ton. This list is comparable to a lot of existing ones. --Deville (Talk) 18:24, 25 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, not ListCruft per se, but tries to do too much... permanently POV and incomplete with its current ambitions, and a manageable list would not add anything to the existing category.  Dei zio  16:14, 26 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. Specific recording studios certainly have notability.  As can be seen in the article some even have their own wiki article.  Tombride 02:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Didn't notice Deiz's full comment. Delete per Deiz.Tombride 04:38, 27 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Response: Deiz points out that there's already a Category:Recording studios that lists notable studios. But not all those studios are included in the list of famous studios. Or, looking at it the other way, many studios are listed that lack a wiki entry yet no citations are provided. WP:NOR WP:V Cleanr 03:45, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is a great list because it gives locations and shows what studios we need articles for. If I want to find a famous studio in New York, what do I do? Click on every article in the category? That is a major waste of time when the list gives me the answer in two seconds. -- JJay 18:39, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Response: Wikipedia is not Yahoo, but to find a New York recording studio type "New York Recording Studio" in the search box. Spending two minutes reading a long, unsorted list isn't an improvement.  Notable studios that lack articles should have stubs created as that's the time-proven way to generate more quality articles.   It also provides a mechanism to deal with them individually to determine notability and verify information. Cleanr 21:44, 28 March 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: It's interesting that you know so much about "time-proven ways" and the other inner workings at wikipedia since this nom was your very first edit at wikipedia and you have now racked up 14 edits here . I would leave you a welcome message, but you are obviously way too fast a learner to need that. -- JJay 22:00, 28 March 2006 (UTC)


 * Delete,  WP:NOT the Yellow Pages, most "List of famous foo" are problematic in this way. Sandstein 09:05, 1 April 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.