Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Women Inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame


 * 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.  MBisanz  talk 03:27, 1 May 2009 (UTC)

Women Inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This is a content fork and no references or indication of the notability of this topic is given. I'm not really a fan of these gender/race/nationality split lists, especially in cases like this. Why not Canadians or Germans or posthumous inductees. Hell, why not "Metal acts inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame", since it has received far more coverage. We have a List of Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductees (and it's a pretty good list, if I do say so myself), so why are splits needed?
 * I'm not sure why the fact that a certain editor is "not a fan" of specific pages is a sturdy argument for deletion. --Rytch303 (talk) 23:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Also, I believe the lead misrepresents the article. It declares that it is notable because "only a relative handful of women have been inducted", thus insinuating that women have been snubbed. This is untrue since almost every year has seen at least one inductee and is 50 really a handful? In fact, I've read articles that say that too many undeserving women acts are inducted. -- Scorpion 0422  01:49, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * There have been 24 Induction Ceremonies, but only 18 of them have included female artists. Every ceremony has included male artists.  --Rytch303 (talk) 22:49, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  --  J mundo 02:13, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  --  J mundo 02:14, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Appropriate list article, and more complete than the main article. Cf. 1990, the Platters. Good evidence why we need it. DGG (talk) 02:51, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, Taylor isn't listed in the RRHOF profile as being inducted (you know, following what's verifiable), which is why she wasn't previously included. I think lists like these set terrible precedents, especially since absoloutely no proof of notability is given. Why not create articles for every gender/nationality/ethnicity/religion/etc. for every Hall of Fame or award? Let's leave lists like that to fansites and official websites and keep wikipedia to articles about notable topics rather than a list of what is basically trivia.
 * At the very least, it should be merged into the main article (I could set up a system which identifies the female inductees, but I really think it's pointless). -- Scorpion 0422  03:16, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I can't tell whether Zola Taylor was or wasn't inducted as a member of the Platters. For some groups, the Hall of Fame web site specifically identifies who the inductees were, but apparently not for the Platters. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * the citation on the site includes her. DGG (talk) 18:41, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete You can't have list for every single different type of band inducted into the hall of fame. This would set a precedent for a variety of ridiculous lists being compiled. Tej68 (talk) 04:20, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This list does not argue for "ridiculous' lists; it represents only itself. --Rytch303 (talk) 22:48, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Why exactly do we need this article when you could just indicate on the List of inductees which ones are women, so much easier. It also makes more sense.Tej68 (talk) 01:10, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete - Or if we keep it, I think the next step is List of Caucasian-American men that have or once had a goatee and long hair inducted after the year 1997. ~ Wakanda's Black Panther! &spades; / &diams; 07:18, 23 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a category which is not recognized by the recording industry as a requisite for awards. --Rytch303 (talk) 22:46, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * That's a strawman. A split for gender is nothing near as ridiculous as the list you're suggesting here. - Mgm|(talk) 10:32, 23 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete content fork. The HOF inductees list is more than sufficient. There is no compelling reason for this level of atomization. We could, after all, have "list of jews" "list of christians" "list of lesbians" "list of rockers under 5'10" " in the HOF, and they would be equally ridiculous and damaging. This is trivia.
 * These are categories which are not recognized by the recording industry in terms of awards. --Rytch303 (talk) 23:09, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * So? How does the Grammys splitting their categories by gender relate to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? Why not start a "women in Rock and Roll" page instead? The Grammies also split their awards by genre, so should there by "Reggae artists inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame" or "Hip hop artists inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame" (in fact, the latter has generated a lot more controversy and discussion, but it still is rather unnecessary. -- Scorpion 0422  23:13, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I would be happy to debate the inclusion of these pages should another editor choose to create them. )Genre and gender both provide distinction within award-giving in the recording industry.)  However, I would prefer to debate the viability of this specific page.  The assertion that the inclusion of hip-hop artists has created more controversy than the inclusion of female artists is unfounded and undocumented.  the exclusion of both categories of artists has been fodder for the press.  I doubt one could assert the disinclusion of one group as greater than the other.  --Rytch303 (talk) 23:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Keep Though the raw data for this list is (mostly) available in the original Rock Hall article, grouping inductees by gender brings a lens that illuminates the subject differently. Its usefulness is distinct from the original article because this grouping promotes analysis of a trend, highlighting the rate at which female artists were inducted. It served me as a useful roster that I didn’t have to recreate on my own.

Specifically, I’m a grad student currently working on a paper about the historiography of Rock and related genres. I referred to this list several times for the section about the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame’s role in canonizing who rates as a “Rock Legend”. Gender absolutely matters in Rock and Roll, so much so that the comparison to other subcategories is insulting. Gender is a primary lens through which artists in the Rock genre are regarded, given the nature of rock culture and history. When and how the Rock Hall chooses to (or chooses not to) induct female artists has crucial influence on the perception that women are significant in shaping the music. That influence makes this list noteable.

Several other “Women in…” articles have been created as companions to the list of all honorees (List of Olympic medalists in athletics (women), List of female state governors in the United States, List of U.S. military vessels named after women...). Actually, what I would like to see in the article is a broader discussion of controversies surrounding the in/exclusion of women from the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. The list implies that there is a significant discrepancy, but it could flesh that idea out more frankly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wndergirl (talk • contribs) 02:43, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: User blocked as a sock puppet of.


 * In the case of List of Olympic medalists in athletics (women), it's a length issue. There are so many medalists, that the page had to be split and gender was the most logical choice. There is also a List of Olympic medalists in athletics (men). In List of female state governors in the United States is a list where that data is not available on any other single page. In this case, it pretty much recreates the content already on a single page (AKA content forking). -- Scorpion 0422  02:53, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * So, if another editor were to create a page which named every US governor, would this list be useless? --Rytch303 (talk) 22:53, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Come again? You also have to remember that being Governor of a state is considerably more notable than being in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. Like I said above, in the case of the female governors, there is no other single list, so it's not a fork and does have uses. -- Scorpion 0422  22:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * How are you defining notability? That sounds like a specious argument. --Rytch303 (talk)  —Preceding undated comment added 23:02, 25 April 2009 (UTC).
 * Per the notability guideline. At the same time, this page is content forking (read the last paragraph of "What forking is") and it does not meet the requirements of the stand-alone list guideline because it pretty much just recreates the content of another page adds very little in the way of original content. Would you be willing to accept the page being redirected to the list of inductees if I put together a system to highlight female inductees? Although I really dislike that idea because even if awards are split by gender (for obvious reasons), the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is not. And this article suggests that female inductees in the Hall of Fame than any other division and giving it undue weight. -- Scorpion 0422  23:13, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * What would the page look like if notations were made for gender? --Rytch303 (talk) 23:31, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I still don't comprehend what you posit as "obvious reasons". -Rytch303 (talk) 00:04, 26 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep. The idea that allowing this list means we would allow all such split lists is a fallacy.  Consensus determines what we allow, and I'm more than happy to allow this as its existence improves the encyclopedia by offering focussed and significant information to our readers. It's sourced, it's neutral, it's therefore fine. Hiding T 12:44, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Which article are you looking at? I don't see a single source anywhere on the page. -- Scorpion 0422  14:16, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * My mistake. It's sourcable. Hiding T 19:30, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Gender is a significant category in the recording industry, particularly in the arena of award-giving.  Other major industry awards such as the Grammys and the American Music Awards are doled out according to gender (not race, national origin, sexual orientation, or other qualities based on the artists themselves that have been suggested by others on this page).  As there are separate categories for male artists and female artists in many genres, the recording industry itself must then see gender as a defining category for contemporary music.  Similarly, major music magazines and television networks (Rolling Stone, MTV, and VH1) have created notable content around this theme as well.  Therefore, the significance of gender (already made notable by the recording industry itself) is reinforced in cultural discourse through articles and programming which further define the unique relationship of gender to contemporary music-making and the recording industry.

While the Rock Hall itself does not make use of gender categorization in its own awards, the fact that gender has become a defining category within the industry means its awards are not immune from interpretation along gender lines. While the gendered structure of the Grammy Awards can create something of a balance between male and female winners, the Hall of Fame Inductees are overwhelmingly male, thereby creating an interesting series of questions about how the Hall itself interprets (or doesn’t interpret) gender as a salient category within the recording industry. (The grad student writing above speaks to this point quite well.) It should, however, be noted that while the Rock Hall does not separate awards by gender, it does promote various programming at its museum around the theme of Women in/and Rock.

As a few editors have argued that this list paves the way for (indeed) ridiculous lists such as lesbians, or Canadians, or Jews, I think the point to remember is that the recording industry itself does not single out categories such as these in terms of award-giving. Gender, however, is a category that has been ensconced into its award-giving history, and therefore makes a valid point of departure from the main list of Hall of Fame inductees.

I have also contacted the Rock Hall (by email) to clarify the question about Zola Taylor as their website indeed leaves the matter up for interpretation. --Rytch303 (talk) 14:59, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * I've tried to contact them in the past and gotten no response. So, there are the Juno Awards, which are pretty much solely for Canadian artists, so does not indicate a significant division? So, using your logic, we could start a list of Canadians inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. As well, this isn't an article about women in the Hall of Fame, it's just a content fork and could easily be redirected back to the list. If indicating gender is really necessary, I can put together a system that would indicate women. -- Scorpion 0422  15:57, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The Junos, like the Grammys, divide awards by gender and also induct artists into its own Canadian Hall of Fame. --Rytch303 (talk) 21:45, 25 April 2009 (UTC)


 * My argument only concerns the significance of the relationship between gender, the recording industry, and contemporary music-making (as posited by the industry itself). If someone else would like to create another page of Canadians (or Muslims or Asian-Americans), I would be happy to debate its merits.  However, for now, it is only this page which is up for debate.  The argument that this page opens up the possibility for other (possibly not as appropriate) sub-lists is a tendentious one that assumes the purpose of this page (or other pages like it) have a political motivation instead of one grounded in already extant definitions and strictures made by the recording industry.  --Rytch303 (talk) 21:11, 25 April 2009 (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.