Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of official record charts


 * 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. --Core desat  01:02, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

List of official record charts

 * – (View AfD) (View log)


 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a repository of links. &mdash; AnemoneProjectors  ( talk ) 00:11, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Per AnemoneProjectors. FireSpike 01:03, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Per Nom. Buf7579 01:12, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. &mdash; ERcheck (talk) 01:29, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep if external links are removed and only internal links remain. Can be useful for finding articles about official record charts for a country. YooChung 01:34, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep for exactly the same reasons as YooChung, Useful repository if organised correctly.  Eliminator JR  Talk  02:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete linkfarm. By the way, what is an "official" record chart? Whoever wrote the article doesn't bother to explain, let alone cite any sources. Otto4711 03:58, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep as it isn't an indiscriminate list of links; it's one website per country. "Has had a charted hit on any national music chart" is a top indicator of notability on these AfD boards (after the central criterion), so it's a valuable resource for editors. --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 04:02, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * What constitutes an "official" national record chart? i have never heard that any country keeps any sort of "official" chart for music. Otto4711 04:30, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Hm, you make a good point. What qualifies as a national music chart in WP:BAND? "Official" isn't an appropriate word for a list of music charts, and apparently a list of charts exists at Music chart. --Strangerer (Talk | Contribs) 04:55, 9 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete' per nom. Maybe Speedy Delete per A3 (consists only of links elswhere). TJ Spyke 05:14, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete - Not a list of links. Philippe Beaudette 05:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete: Not a list of links.  Seicer  (talk) (contribs) 05:33, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete There's no such thing as an "official" music chart. -- Chairman S. Talk  Contribs  06:07, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT. Mkdw talk 07:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per above, article is basically a list of external links. -  An as   Talk? 10:15, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete textbook WP:NOT.-- danntm T C 19:30, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as already pointed out there is no such thing as an 'official' chart therefore a list of them is OR and POV. Nuttah68 20:06, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment the BBC chart is generally a given as the "official" chart in the UK, being based on record sales rather than anything else. Other countries? ....  Eliminator JR   Talk  20:46, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. TonyTheTiger (talk/cont/bio) 21:17, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete or cleanup If the external links are not removed and it is made into a proper list and not displayed like a category, then it would meet the criteria but at the minute it fails Wikipedia is not a place for external links. Aquasplash 21:25, 9 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete Re: What Wikipedia is not —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Frickeg (talk • contribs) 01:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC).
 * Keep – Given the overall low quality of most texts and the unreliability of all texts, finding external links is the only sensible way to use Wikipedia. This may be contrary to its own rules and regulations but conforms to the needs of average users. This list turned out to be of great use for me (that's why I stumbled over it) and beats every quarter-truth of any pop-star article here. 217.224.130.146 10:32, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Comment given that you consider the user provided text in Wikipedia to be of 'low quality' and have high 'unreliability' don't you feel slightly strange taking as reliable quality the links provided by the exact same users? Nuttah68 10:53, 10 March 2007 (UTC)
 * No, not at all. One click and I know about the trustworthiness of an external link. Judgement of text takes much longer. 217.80.96.223 20:39, 10 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree that the article, as it exists, conforms to the description of a list of links, and should not stay as it currently exists. However, many articles have appropriate external links, and this easily could be expanded into a genuine article with the external links relegated to the appropriate section of that article.  There is a distinction between official and unofficial music charts, by the way, which explanation would be an appropriate inclusion in this article. Fcgier 19:57, 1 March 2007 (UTC)
 * keep —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.0.129.108 (talk • contribs).
 * Why? &mdash; AnemoneProjectors  ( zomg! ) 20:51, 12 March 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.