Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of songs with the same name as song artists


 * 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 of the debate was keep. -- King of Hearts | (talk) 19:02, 31 December 2005 (UTC)

List of songs with the same name as song artists
nn listcruft and unencyclopedic. WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. I'm geting tired of all these random song lists, there seem to be LOTS of arbitrary lists going around. Delete Zunaid 09:30, 21 December 2005 (UTC) TD|Wishy Washy]] Darwikinian Eventualist 15:05, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Very serious approach to the subject. List demonstrates the kind of careful scholarship I expect from this type of classification. Highly useful for cultural historians. We need more like this. -- JJay 09:42, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep, lists about songs named after the artist who performs them is not something arbitrary. - Mgm|(talk) 11:11, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * But is it encyclopedic? IMHO it is "indiscriminate information". Please convince me otherwise. Zunaid
 * Keep, simply because I believe it is notable. Additionally, WP has many other similar lists that I believe are appropriate and I believe singling this one out would also be unfair. Halo 14:02, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep - agreed, this is a good list. Zordrac (talk) [[M:AWWDMBJAWGCAWAIFDSPBATDM
 * Weak Keep, still listcruft, but at least it's on a fairly rare and notable occurance.Gateman1997 17:59, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Modify for maintainability. Current version will be unwieldy (and is on the verge of being so now). I'd suggest limiting the sccpe to those eponymous singles that made an appearance on a singles chart of a definitive trade publication like Billboard, New Musical Express, or the (now defunct) Cashbox.  This cuts it down to manageable size with a somewhat standard set of limits. B.Wind 19:03, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * This should already be done. We shouldn't include any song in a list if it doesn't deserve coverage on its own (or in the band/artist article). - Mgm|(talk) 08:58, 22 December 2005 (UTC)


 * Keep good list, why not? Jcuk 21:26, 21 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Delete, no encyclopedical value, listcruft. Pavel Vozenilek 03:20, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep I for one, found it interesting. It shows the egotism of some music groups. Wikipedia, being user created, SHOULD include more obscure info that most people wont care about. Tehw1k1 23:33, 23 December 2005 (UTC)
 * Keep. Hey, nominator: People like to make lists. It's fun to do, It's not hurting anyone, might have some use to somebody someday, and in the meantime is diverting to read. Let it go. Herostratus 05:21, 29 December 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 a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.