Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs about romance (including breakups)


 * 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 on a Votes for Undeletion nomination).  No further edits should be made to this page.  

The result of the debate was Delete. R e  dwolf24  (talk) 05:09, 2 October 2005 (UTC)

List of songs about romance (including breakups)
This list would, if complete, be immense. I don't know what percentage of popular songs are about romance, but I'd be surprised if it came in under 75%. The list is thus impractical; it also lacks point. Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 22:45, 22 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete &mdash; just to make things clear. --Mel Etitis ( Μελ Ετητης ) 22:45, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete -Lethe | Talk 23:00, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete as per nom. Sigh. Groeck 23:20, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Aren't there many lists here, which will never be complete? OmegaWikipedia 23:23, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Yes, and most of them probably need deleting CLW 10:17, 23 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete List of songs NOT about romance would be 3 times as useful if Mel Etitis is right.  No problem with lists which will never be complete but bthis will be huge, unmaintainable and uninformative.  Dlyons493 23:34, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Write a sad song about it if you please. Sabine's Sunbird 23:31, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, in D-minor which is the saddest of all keys. Unmanageable. Can we start a Wikibook of lists to get rid of all this listcruft? WCFrancis 00:44, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, it might as well be "list of songs" DDerby (talk) 02:28, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Note, however, that it's a pretty nice-looking list, with many sections: I don't know if it would be appropriate to userfy or something. DDerby (talk) 02:37, 23 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Delete - can't be completed CLW 10:17, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Weak keep. It may well be list of songs because most songs are about romance (unfortunatly). However, I appreciate the amount of work that went into categorizing this list which makes it much more informative than it would've been without sectioning. - 131.211.210.12 10:21, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. I agree with User:131.211.210.12 that is the categorization which makes this list useful. I've seen several romance songs lists, but not one who classified them by themes. That it would never be finished it doesn't means what already is here isn't useful. --Andromeda 10:48, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * weak delete. The structure of the list is completely ad-hoc (and will stay like that forever), since the topics are often non-exclusive (e.g., "divorce" usually implies "separation").   Why is there "bitterness" but no "sadness" (where  Yesterday would fit well, better than in the nondescript "separation")?  --Aleph4 12:11, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep! This is the first serious attempt I've ever seen to categorize love songs by topic. The list doesn't need to be complete--it will never be. But even as is, it is already useful for social reseacrh. Owen&times; &#9742;  12:21, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * "it is already useful for social reseacrh"? Could you expand? This is a puzzling claim. --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 13:07, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Anyone looking for cultural references for Western society's attitude towards marriage, adultery, jealousy, etc. has an easy source list for their research. Owen&times; &#9742;  13:17, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Anyone who thought that the titles or even lyrics of pop songs could simply be taken to reflect Western society's attitudes would be sadly deluded. I seriously doubt that this is or is likely to be a useful resource; it's just a list, made by people who like making lists about their hobbies. It's another version of train-spotting, and while it's harmless, it shouldn't be here. --Mel Etitis  ( Μελ Ετητης ) 14:01, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Whether correctly or not, pop culture is often used as an indicator of society's views. Owen&times; &#9742;  15:13, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Regardless of the value of the categorization, it's original research. &mdash;Wahoofive (talk) 16:04, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unmaintainable + original research. &mdash; mendel &#9742; 17:07, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete... what is it, autumnal equinox is listcruft season? --MCB 23:02, 23 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep but I'd prefer it as a category ··gracefool |&#9786; 07:51, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete per nominator. Xoloz 08:18, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. This list will never be complete. The sections constitute original research. Article has no encyclopedic value. Quale 07:05, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete overly broad topic for a list --TimPope 17:51, 27 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete. Clearly non-encyclopaedic; no real value added. --Daveb 12:30, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete. A list is a terrible way to organize these songs. We can either have a woefully incomplete list or a absolutely unmaintainable one. I agree that 75%+ of songs would fit the criteria of this list. We wouldn't keep an article such as List of all songs, so why would we keep a list that's only 25% smaller? Carbonite | Talk 12:38, 28 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Comment: Just conclude this ballot since all these people have voted delete. (unsigned comment from anon)
 * Keep What about all the other lists of songs. I think the list is a bit odd but someone may have a use for it. See also Articles for deletion/List of songs with brackets in their titles and Articles for deletion/List of song titles phrased as questions. It's either that or where do we stop at deleting lists? CambridgeBayWeather 22:01, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, unmaintainable. Extraordinary Machine 11:26, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Divorce, uh, make that Delete. You couldn't even make a reasonably short list of all the love songs released this year, never mind a general list. Haikupoet 17:40, 1 October 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep Completness or even the lack of possibility of completeness is not a problem. Categorization while problematic is not original reasearch. Paul August &#9742; 02:17, 2 October 2005 (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 an undeletion request). No further edits should be made to this page.