Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sets of unrelated albums with identical titles


 * 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. - Mailer Diablo 04:15, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

List of sets of unrelated albums with identical titles

 * — (View AfD)

This list violates WP:NOT. There is nothing interesting to be said about albums with identical titles that warrants an article on them, much less a list of examples.Bjart 20:18, 17 December 2006 (UTC) savidan(talk) (e@) 05:18, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. If two albums have the same title, mention it on a disambiguation page for that album; there's no need to mention it in a centralised place. I've listed it on the daily log now. Graham 87 03:08, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep. I find the information useful. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 03:56, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * "Useful" is not a valid keep criterion, in the same way that "not useful" is not a deletion criterion. Please cite relevant policies/guidelines this subject passes in order for it to be kept.  Zun aid  © Please rate me at Editor Review! 
 * "Useful" is perfectly valid counterpoint to deletion based on "indiscriminate". Indiscriminate is a catchall for saying it has no use in Wikipedia. It should be labeled as a disambiguation page too. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) 23:51, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm going to go with keep also.
 * AfD is not a vote count. Please cite relevant policies/guidelines this subject passes in order for it to be kept.  Zun aid  © Please rate me at Editor Review! 
 * Delete per nom. Danny Lilithborne 06:07, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. MER-C 06:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, listcruft, WP:NOT. For goodness sake, a Listpedia should be created. Ter e nce Ong 07:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete - create disambig pages, not lists. SkierRMH 07:53, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Strong Keep Check the history, look how many wikipedians contributed! Many individuals clearly want this entry to exist. Rearden Metal 08:36, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * "How many Wikipedians contributed" is not a valid keep criterion, in the same way that a "sparsely edited" article is not a valid deletion criterion. Please cite relevant policies/guidelines this subject passes in order for it to be kept.  Zun aid  © Please rate me at Editor Review! 
 * Delete. The list of unrelated songs with identical titles is interesting, because a song's title reflects its lyrics and melody, but an album can really have any title, and most of these titles listed here are so common that there's bound to be coincidences. J I P  | Talk 10:43, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete this list per WP:NOT. Doczilla 11:13, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete, superceded by disambiguation pages really. Punkmorten 17:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom, I thought I already saw this on AfD -  The RSJ  ¿Qué?  02:15, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete per above reasons. A totally random and unnecessary list that is far better dealt with by using disambiguation pages (seeing as this is precisely what those pages are for). --The Way 06:33, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete unambiguously indiscriminate and arbitrary. WP:USEFUL does not trump WP:NOT. Guy (Help!) 12:56, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete and userfy if anyone cares to, because it is an interesting list. But if anyone actually wanted information about one of these albums, they'd see the relevant info on the disambiguation page. Not encyclopedic. --Quuxplusone 02:02, 24 December 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.