Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs recorded by Mohammed Rafi


 * 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. I suspect that any close I make here is going to be whizzing along to DRV very quickly (you don't need to discuss with me, just let me know) but I have closed NC here because there doesn't seem to be agreement as to what actually comprises a deletion reason when a list doesn't fall under SALAT but is instead a split-out. Also, I note that at least one of the lists (List of songs recorded by Mohammed Rafi (A–C)) has started to be improved and sourced; I suspect that if all of the articles could be fixed in that manner there might be fewer issues; I agree that the pure lists are not, at the moment, particularly encyclopedic, but that's simply my opinion. Black Kite (talk) 22:29, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

List of songs recorded by Mohammed Rafi

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I am also nominating the following related pages because of the rational below:

Complete unsourced listcruft. Wikipedia is not a directory. Many, if not all of the entries are not-notable in their own right, so it fails WP:SAL.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 11:21, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC) Note: Please consider reading WP:INDAFD which includes some points about WikiProject India AFDs. Those may or may not be applicable here. Tito ☸ Dutta 07:30, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete all - The lists for being completely unsourced and non-notable and the list of lists because it is bereft of content. T  C  N7 JM  18:26, 8 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  D u s t i *Let's talk!* 00:50, 12 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - I wouldn't object to a list of notable works, but these lists are ridiculous. WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:NOTDIR, etc. ~Amatulić (talk) 00:57, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep: I personally find the list to be notable enough to stay. Rafi had claimed to have recorded 25k-26k songs in his letter to Guinness World Records. Finally GWR mentioned his claim as claim and wrote only 4516 songs. We over here have over 5000 songs. And i don't quite understand why List of songs recorded by Selena gets to stay and this doesn't? Is it because it doesnt have a lengthy prose, no pictures, no proper format? Or is it because its just too long? And how is nominator calling all entries as non-notable? I doubt he has any knowledge of the subject. Why is "Aaj Mausam Bada Beimaan Hain" non-notable? §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 08:21, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * See WP:OTHERSTUFF. We judge each article independently of others. If another article needs deleting also, then propose it. But the existence of one article is not a justification to keep or delete another. I am sure there are some notable songs in the list under discussion here, but Wikipedia isn't an indiscriminate collection of information, and this list is an indiscriminate collection of song titles that happened to be performed by one musician. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:31, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Non of the songs on any of the lists are notable - IE they don't have their own article. There's no point in having pages of song titles that simply don't meet the notability threshold.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 09:41, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * So you mean a list should only exist when a category can also exist? §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 12:56, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No, that's not what I mean at all.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 17:17, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep. This is the second nomination for this article, please see Articles for deletion/List of Songs by Mohammed Rafi - where there was a substantial vote in favor of keep. I have not changed my mind, yet. --Richhoncho (talk) 09:34, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * So what policy based rationale do you have to keep this?  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 10:29, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'd like to know also. The 'keep' arguments in that other AFD were primarily based on WP:OTHERSTUFF and 'me too'. No policy-based rationale to keep, while we have WP:NOTDIR and WP:INDISCRIMINATE as arguments to delete. ~Amatulić (talk) 14:47, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Admins are not forced to close the AfDs after the 7 days period. If no worthy rationale is made, relisting or no-consensus is a likely result. (Correct me if i am wrong as you would know better than me.) The consensus of the previous AFD was keep. What has changed now that the articles should now be deleted? Did Rafi unsung his songs? §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 16:07, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Consensus can change. Nothing from the last AfD actually was linked to any policies. These lists clearly fail WP:SAL, WP:NOTDIR and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. Unless you can argue otherwise.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 17:31, 13 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep Per User:Dharmadhyaksha. There is long standing precedent of discographies by artists (see Category:Lists of songs by recording artists ). Unless the nominator can show how this is different from the other 250 pages Keep. The Legend   of Zorro  06:22, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * All of the individual songs can be easily referenced. For example reference for the first entry Aa Aa Aa Chhori Aa Aa Aa, Ja Ja Ja Chhora Ja Ja Ja. So referencing individual entries is not a problem. The Legend   of Zorro  06:34, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:OTHERSTUFF is not a good arguement for keeping. The category you quote does contain many lists, and most of them are notable (IE - they have lists of songs by each artist that are notable in their own right). Sourcing that the song exists does not equate to the song being notable. Can you not see that these lists are just a load of non-notable items? How do they pass the notability requirements? Or the requirements for a stand-alone list?  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 07:10, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * How do you know that the individual songs are non notable? As I can see while the individual artists have bluelinks in National Film Award for Best Male Playback Singer or Best Female Playback Singer or Best Lyrics or Best Choreography the individual songs for which they won it are redlinks. It is high time to create the pages not delete them. The Legend   of Zorro  07:25, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * So all of these 20,000+ songs are notable in their own right? Maybe you'd like to create articles for each one. As it stands, this is a clear violation of WP:NOTDIR.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 08:36, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The 20,000+ figure is debatable however I did not claimed that all of his songs are notable. However a good many are deserving articles and all of the entries can be referenced as shown above. The Legend   of Zorro  08:44, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, so how does these lists meet WP:SAL and the WP:GNG? They are lists of non-notable items.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 09:42, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * See my comment 3 cm above. This is same as the 250 other pages in Category:Lists of songs by recording artists. Not all but many of them are notable in their own right. This passes WP:SAL and the WP:GNG. The Legend   of Zorro  10:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This is actually nothing like most of the other pages in the category you've linked. I've chosen a random page from that category, List of songs recorded by 30 Seconds to Mars. Take that list and compare it to any one of the lists up for deletion. Notice a difference? Almost any song in the 30 Seconds to Mars list either has a link to itself because it is itself notable, or it has a link to the album it was included in in the next column, where it is listed in a track listing. Not to mention that the 30 Seconds to Mars list has many references and external links. These lists, on the other hand, are just names of songs, some of which have the year the list claims them to be released in afterward. There are no sources, no external links, nothing at all proving any of this is notable. In that regard, this list does, indeed, fail WP:SAL. T  C  N7 JM  10:24, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * So you would say keep if the film articles were linked and what awards the songs won were written? §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 10:44, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm saying I would !vote keep if the songs proved notability. Nothing in the list proves any kind of notability. T  C  N7 JM  10:48, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Note that WP:SAL clearly states "Every entry meets the notability criteria for its own non-redirect article in the English Wikipedia", so I have no idea how Zorro comes to the rationale that these lists are notable.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 12:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Do not wikilawyer please. WP:SAL is not a policy but reflects a consensus of a notability threshold. The Legend   of Zorro  13:10, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Wikilawyer is not a policy either. Do you know any policies and how they work?  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 13:39, 14 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - Agree with Lugnuts. Fails on multiple levels. Caffeyw (talk) 10:23, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete - The sheer number of guidelines which every one of these nominated articles fails could in and of itself form a long, winding list. It's an indiscriminate collection of songs, not all of which are notable and the collection itself seems like it was mostly copied/compiled/lifted/however-you-want-to-term-it from a number of English-language weblogs for Hindi music. It's just a pointless catalog of largely non-notable work posing as an encyclopedia entry. MezzoMezzo (talk) 05:28, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep - Rafi is an extremely notable singer and just because his discography is gargantuan doesn't mean that and individual song is less legitimate than another.Pectoretalk 02:50, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * We're not disputing the notability of the individual, but none of the songs are notable in their own right.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 07:07, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * None of the songs? Who decides so? The Legend   of Zorro  07:20, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Well WP:NSONG for one. Have a read.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 07:41, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I wouldn't go as far as to say none of the songs are notable, as I'm not familiar with any of them, but it is obvious that not all of them are. T  C  N7 JM  07:59, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Now exactly that's the thing. None of you are familiar with any of the song. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 08:13, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * But I am familiar with the notability policies, which you don't appear to be. Have a read of the song policy.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 08:53, 16 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete--This is a list of no notable items. This fails WP:SAL. Delete all this kind of article, except article split due to WP:TOOLONG--- Jayanta Nath (Talk 15:18, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This is not a stand-alone list, so WP:SAL does not apply, but is an article split due to WP:TOOLONG, or do you think that there is room in Mohammed Rafi for this list? Phil Bridger (talk) 21:18, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete all as lacking in depth coverage in reliable sources as required by the WP:GNG. If such sources get added to the article, feel free to ping my talk page. Stuartyeates (talk) 04:08, 19 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Relisting comment: I am inclined to delete the lists, since none of the four keeps are based on the policies, and most of them are countered by OTHERSTUFF. However, four is a significant minority, and I am relisting the nomination for one more week.--Ymblanter (talk) 15:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)


 * And which of the deletes are based on policy? If you read WP:SAL, WP:DIRECTORY and WP:INDISCRIMINATE you will see that none of them is remotely applicable. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:35, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ymblanter (talk) 15:45, 20 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete No keeps have substantially proven why a huge list of mostly unremarkable songs deserves to stay. Previous "List of songs recorded by artist" lists have ended in delete.  Taylor Trescott  - my talk + my edits 20:16, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete It's just a huge list of non-notable songs. Fails WP:NOTDIR. StevenD99  Talk &#124;  Stalk 00:16, 21 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Did you know ...that majority of the Delete voters in this AfD can't even understand Hindi and lack competence to call stuff they don't understand as non-notable? §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 03:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Did you know ...that WP:GNG is written in such a way that we don't have to speak Hindi or understand the topic, only the referencing? Stuartyeates (talk) 07:20, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Dharmadhyaksha - Maybe you can fix the article for the less gifted of us who don't speak Hindi?  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 08:52, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I can fix the article. But the problem here is more of bias. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 09:16, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * If you have a plan for fixing the article, I strongly suggest that you articulate it clearly. A doable plan for achieving clear notability is likely to see changes in !votes. Stuartyeates (talk) 09:46, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I thought we didn't have any time limits on Wikipedia as i alone can't sit and fight such bias everywhere. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 11:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * There is no time limit here, but that doesn't protect pages that don't establish notability to stay in article space forever until somebody comes along and does so. There's nothing wrong with moving the pages to your userspace if you intend to improve the articles for them to be moved back to article space later. Can I also ask that you please stop accusing us delete !voters of bias? Accusations like this border on uncivil behavior and should be avoided. T  C  N7 JM  12:14, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Yes you can ask. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 13:32, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Rather than continually claiming that it depends on the referencing currently within the article try reading WP:GNG, and you will see that it is not written in such a way. It depends on the existence of sources, which is something that is difficult to check if you don't understand the language or the script that they are written in. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:35, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Note to closing admin: If deleted, please move all the pages to my user space. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 11:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Make a copy of them in your user-space anyway.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 13:40, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You have problem even with that? §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 17:04, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * How hard is it for you to setup a sandbox page and copy & paste the text into it right now? Why should an admin do this for you?  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 17:41, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Very. And he should only if he is deleting this. & basically it isn't your business. Also try reading WP:CWW. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 18:28, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Do not copy and paste for reasons explained in some details at Copying within Wikipedia. Even after the deletion is long over, you can ask for a WP:REFUND. Stuartyeates (talk) 23:26, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I can do that and i can do this. You people objecting on my request to userify these lists if deleted makes my and other editors opinion stronger on bias being the reason for these all AfDs. §§ Dharmadhyaksha §§ {T/C} 03:57, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep: A book was published from these few articles,, though this book can not be accepted as source in Wikipedia per WP:MIRROR, the popularity of the topic should be noted here. More books have been written only on the songs of Rafi, for example see . Please also note, very recently Indian music company SaReGaMa published a "giant collection" of Md. Rafi's songs. This initiative was supported by India Times. I am searching for more sources. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 18:57, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Pretty much any page(s) on here can, and indeed have, been published as books via Google books. That's nowhere near close to establishing notability. Here are just some examples one, two, three.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 19:10, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * edit conflict twice.. Yes, you are right, theoretically one may publish all Wikipedia articles as books following Wikipedia licenses. But, practically not all articles are published, only a small number of articles (in comparison of the total number of articles at Wikipedia). And the second book above is not related to Wikipedia. I have just got information of another book Mohammed Rafi ke Amar Geetiyan dedicated on the songs of Md. Rafi. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 19:24, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Firstly, can you link to said book? Second, how does this establish notability for every single one of the songs on the lists? WP:SAL states that they either must all be notable or they must all not be, and the title Selected Songs of Rafi (Roman) implies that this is just a list of selected songs that the author deemed notable enough for inclusion. T  C  N7 JM  20:39, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * User talk:TCN7JM, I have linked two books above which I have found in Google Books. I have not found any online copy of the third book. I have been informed that in between 2000—2002 several full length articles of Md Rafi's songs were written in Hindi newspaper Sanmarg. I am trying to find these news articles and other sources at this moment. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 21:25, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That "book" is an automatically generated publication that doesn't exist on paper unless someone has been fool enough to pay an exorbitant amount for a physical copy. Such books are available for every Wikipedia category that has been around lonbg enough for the the scammers to pick it up. There are reasons to keep these articles, but this is not one of them. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, and I'm shocked by the number of "delete" opinions we have had here. We routinely have complete lists of songs for many barely notable British and American singers, but there are people who consider themselves qualified to decide what goes in an encyclopedia and say that we shouldn't have such a list for one of the greatest Indian popular music singers of all time. This is not WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, but such extreme systemic bias as to amount to institutional racism. Phil Bridger (talk) 20:58, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Now I've calmed down a bit I'll address those who think that common sense can be bypassed by quoting some alphabet soup. The policy reasons that have been given for deletion are WP:SAL, WP:DIRECTORY and WP:INDISCRIMINATE. This is not a stand-alone list, but a sub-article of Mohammed Rafi with content that is obviously too long to have in the main article, and none of the seven criteria of WP:DIRECTORY or the three criteria of WP:INDISCRIMINATE come anywhere within a million miles of describing these articles. Phil Bridger (talk) 21:12, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * A stand-alone list is, by definition, an embedded list that stands as its own page. So yes, these are stand-alone lists. T  C  N7 JM  21:58, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That's a pretty poor definition, as these lists do not stand alone but are an integral part of our coverage of Mohammed Rafi. Anyway WP:SAL is part of our manual of style, so does not constitute a deletion criterion, and the more relevant part of our manual of style is WP:WORKS, in particular, "if an article already exists on an author or artist, then a separate article for a list of that person's works ... is warranted if the list becomes so long that its inclusion in the main article would be unsuitable." Phil Bridger (talk) 22:21, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * That does not make it exempt from the other guidelines for stand-alone lists set in the MOS. It still needs to be a list of notable works. T  C  N7 JM  22:33, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Rather than just repeat this mantra that everyone is reciting can you please explain why this needs to be a list only of notable works? And, if you're more interested in slavishly following guidelines than using a bit of common sense to see what is the best way to build an encyclopedia, where in WP:SAL does it actually say that? Part of our coverage of creative artists in any field is to list their works, and if there are too many works to list within the main article we have separate articles. This applies to an American author who has written a couple of books and, just the same, to an Indian singer who has performed thousands of songs. Phil Bridger (talk) 22:47, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * The guideline's common selection criteria's first two numbered points state that a list must contain either only notable works (unless they are all verifiably part of the group the list is covering and could be covered in a forthcoming article), or that it must contain a list of all non-notable works that wouldn't qualify for their own articles at all. T  C  N7 JM  23:03, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Those are, as you say, common selection criteria, and have no "must" about them. What do they have to do with deletion? Phil Bridger (talk) 23:35, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * No guideline has any "must" about it, but I haven't seen a convincing reason to change my !vote based on the guidelines you have presented yet. T  C  N7 JM  23:38, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * You are the one who introduced the word "must", so you can't object to my replying to your specific wording. How do you make the logical leap from two criteria being listed as common selection criteria for lists to the conclusion that lists that use different criteria must (or should, or may on the basis of this criterion) be deleted? That section is simply not talking about anything related to article deletion but just giving some examples. Phil Bridger (talk) 06:55, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:NOTINHERITED and WP:GNG have not been addressed. By your logic, I could start to expand a biography on a chef to list every meal they've ever made. Then due to WP:SIZE, split that out to a stand-alone article and saying that the chef is notable, so therefore the list of meals they've made must also be notable. There is simply nothing to say this huge list of songs is notable. Yes, they exist and the singer is indeed notable, but a list of them that all fail WP:NSONG? Not needed at all.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 07:15, 27 August 2013 (UTC)


 * Possible citations: Found . This books may be used for a number of Rafi songs. If manually searched there are many more books which discusses on the songs of Rafi. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 23:42, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * From what I'm seeing, this book doesn't mention Rafi once. T  C  N7 JM  23:45, 26 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I have started adding the book's content as reference in List of songs recorded by Mohammed Rafi (A–C). Please follow the references which include the page numbers. There are more books, we need to gather all first. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 00:03, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Hold up, my concern was not addressed. Where in this book does it say that Rafi was the singer of these songs? It just seems to say that the songs exist, not that Rafi was the singer, which doesn't seem suitable as a source in this list, seeing as verifiability is one of the problems. T  C  N7 JM  01:02, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I am unsure how and where you are seeing, I am giving you direct link of a page where it mentions "SINGER: Rafi". I have started adding the songs which are included in the list for now. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 02:06, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * Ah, I see now. I guess the English text just registered as a different language seeing as it's surrounded by what I'm assuming is Hindi. Thanks. T  C  N7 JM  02:08, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * They are using IAST. -- Tito ☸ Dutta 02:17, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
 * They say you learn something every day. T  C  N7 JM  03:13, 27 August 2013 (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.