Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of jazz 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   no consensus.   A rbitrarily 0   ( talk ) 22:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

List of jazz albums

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

This list is impossible to maintain and has an inherently POV scope "The following is a list of the most important, notable, historically significant Jazz albums. Consequently, no albums should be in red, only the best articles should appear on this page. Album titles are first." —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 07:00, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Jazz notified.  —AllyD (talk) 08:03, 19 March 2010 (UTC)


 * I don't see a problem with deletion; if they're notable, they'll have articles and be categorized. ¦ Reisio (talk) 09:08, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment Agree, it's entirely subjective. It COULD be fixed, though, if people were willing to put in the effort to find a number of sources for them (see List of important operas as a good for instance on how to do it right). ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 14:10, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Weak keep and/or move to "List of notable jazz albums". As an indiscriminate list, it isn't worth keeping. However, with attributions backing up each albums' notability, it is potentially a valuable resource.  I had proposed some criteria for inclusion in this list (see Talk:List of jazz albums), and there had been some discussion at WP:JAZZ (see here). Red links have no place on any such list.  But I, for one, haven't had the time to put into this effort, and honestly, I am not sure when I would. -- Gyrofrog  (talk) 15:05, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete without prejudice - the problem here is the self-imposed criteria for inclusion on this list: "the most important, notable, historically significant Jazz albums." These are subjective measures so this list will become untenable and indiscriminate if many users add albums that think fit the criteria. The list seems like a useful idea but I just don't think it will work out in reality. D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 17:14, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions.  —  D OOMSDAYER 520  (Talk|Contribs) 17:14, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom plus WP:POV and WP:OR as it says "only the best albums should be listed. What one person or publication deems "the best" is different from another.  Plus if none of are red linked, then they should be categorized already.   Mr. C.C. Hey yo!I didn't do it! 18:27, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete due to POV concern raised in previous discussions referenced above. AllyD (talk) 20:00, 19 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep, just re-scope to "notable jazz albums" if no more selective criteria can be found as for List of important operas. Polarpanda (talk) 12:11, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete - subjective list and of dubious relevance.--Dan8700 (talk) 12:24, 22 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Now This article has been flagged for rescue? Why? So far, there are 6 "delete" vs 3 "keep".--Dan8700 (talk) 15:07, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Not over till it's over. A deletion request doesn't stop time. ¦ Reisio (talk) 15:46, 24 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia is not a poll. Silver  seren C 08:32, 25 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep A list of articles on notable Wikipedia  subjects is appropriate. If we can maintain the articles, we can maintain the list. (that we might possibly have more articles than we are properly maintaining is another matter, but removing a list of them won't help things).

Categories and lists are complementary, and there is no reason not to have both. Lists have the particular advantage of providing some information about the material in which they appear, thus facilitating identification and browsing. Browsing is a key function of an encyclopedia. As a general rule, for topics like this, if there is a category, there should be a list. It should better be a complete list of those in Wikipedia than this selected list, unless some real criterion can be found.  DGG ( talk )


 * Keep. WP:LIST, WP:CLN. If the page can be improved, this should be solved through regular editing, rather than deletion. The lead sentence was rephrased, and the list is now a valid complement to Category:Jazz albums. — Rankiri (talk) 16:37, 25 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Correction: Category:Jazz albums was largely depopulated by User:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars's subcategorization efforts. Last time I looked at it, the category had about 800 entries. Now it only has 360. See User talk:Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars for more info. — Rankiri (talk) 16:56, 25 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Keep, personally I'm not a fan of big navigational lists (I prefer categories and templates) but some people like them and per Categories, lists, and navigation templates, having one does not preclude the others. Having said that the article should strive to include all Jazz Albums with an article not just those which have been subjectively decided to be the "best" or "most important". Guest9999 (talk) 18:34, 25 March 2010 (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.