Youtube

Go to The Main Page Add Youtube to favorite!

Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists 

Points of interest related to Lists on Wikipedia
Portal – Category – WikiProject – Deletions
Deletion Sorting
Project
Project page (talk)
Lists (by ABC)
Lists (by topic)
AfD: Today, Yesterday
· changes

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Lists. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting.

You can help maintain the list on this page:

  • To add a new AfD discussion (once it has already been opened on WP:AFD):
  • Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
  • You can also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Lists}}<small>—~~~~</small> to it, which will inform users that it has been listed here.
  • There are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.
  • Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.
  • You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Lists.

Please note that adding an AfD to, or removing it from, this page does not add it to, or remove it from, the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page, before adding it to this page.

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.


Archive Relevant archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists/archive.
Purge page cache Watch this page

Contents

Lists

American Idol Hot 100 singles

American Idol Hot 100 singles (|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Trivial intersection; a list of all Hot 100 singles for American Idol contestants. This list, in addition to having no sources for the chart positions, is redundant to the existing discography pages. Also, the "Most weeks on chart" sections are unsourced. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 18:27, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

List of songs by American artists which reached number-one on the Eurochart Hot 100

List of songs by American artists which reached number-one on the Eurochart Hot 100 (|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Not a notable article. List of relatively unimportant information

Washburnmav (talk) 14:44, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Strong Keep European charting by American artists certainly strikes me as notable, particularly given how much the WP:MUSIC notability criteria value chart activity. Eurochart Hot 100 is a Billboard-affiliated chart. "Unimportant" is in the eye of the beholder. Townlake (talk) 15:18, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep per Townlake. Mandsford (talk) 20:37, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - This looks like classic Overcategorization to me. -Verdatum (talk) 21:09, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Comment As this list isn't a category, I don't consider this an issue. Townlake (talk) 02:59, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
      • Reply - Point taken, the guideline I referenced is indeed related to categories. I was looking for an expansion of point 5 of WP:NOTDIRECTORY: Non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations, such as "People from ethnic/cultural/religious group X employed by organization Y" or "Restaurants specializing in food type X in city Y". Cross-categories like these are not considered sufficient basis to create an article, unless the intersection of those categories is in some way a culturally significant phenomenon. -Verdatum (talk) 15:41, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep The flying pasty (talk) 15:22, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:18, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 14:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

List of bands named after places

AfDs for this article:
Articles for deletion/List of bands named after places Articles for deletion/List of bands named after places (2nd nomination)
List of bands named after places (|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

I've been unable to verify most of these. Some are no-brainers (e.g. Alabama, the band, so named because they were founded by four people from Fort Payne, Alabama), but others are less obvious. Was Sugarland really named for a place? Were they named after Sugar Land, Texas, The Sugarlands, or what? Et cetera. This is just original research and trivia. And don't get me started on the red links. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 23:54, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Delete Non notable list. Unverified claims. Original research etc... Fails WP:V in some areas. The last AfD had opinions like "I've been looking for a list like this" or "Interesting enough". That doesn't cut it. Undeath (talk) 00:38, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, indiscriminate information even if sourced, and a trivial intersection of topics. Bands from a place is an encyclopedic list, but this is basically trivia. --Dhartung | Talk 01:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, at least until we rename the project trivipedia. This is WP:OR and certainly not encyclopedic.  Frank  |  talk  01:24, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete A victim of its own success. It was nominated shortly after its creation in April 2006, and one of the comments in favor of keep was "This list isn't a list of one-eyed horse thieves from Montana, it's about bands like Chicago, Boston, Alabama, and Japan.". Since then, however, it's grown from perhaps 50 well-known bands ("like Chicago, Boston, Alabama") to hundreds of entries (bands like Calexico, Enon, Missouri). Maybe those are famous bands, maybe not, who's to say, and that's the point. Wikipedia's criteria for a notable band is low enough that if they signed a recording contract with a major label, they get a page, even if they aren't . That which isn't obvious (Kansas was named after the American state of... man, it was right on the tip of my tongue) is just trivia (Cinder Road is "the road in Timonium, Maryland"). No longer interesting enough to be appealing, too much chaff and not enough wheat. Now it's just a dust magnet, but might be a good category on $25,000 Pyramid. Mandsford (talk) 01:25, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete that this wasn't deleted the first time around is a bit of a mystery. JuJube (talk) 02:19, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Interesting concept. It could be useful and does no harm to anyone. But why do a bunch of Englishmen have the right to name their band "Japan"? Steve Dufour (talk) 02:48, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Non notable list, per Voooooooooooor.  Esradekan Gibb  "Talk" 02:53, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Unsourced and likely ORed list of trivia. – sgeureka t•c 10:57, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete is where I'm coming down on this one. Maybe the bands are notable, maybe the places are notable... but there is no reason I can see to have a correlation between the two.--Paul McDonald (talk) 19:41, 18 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Speedy keep due to clear consensus to keep in first discussion and per Wikipedia:Lists (discriminate, encyclopedic, maintainable, notable, unoriginal, and verifiable). --Happy editing! Sincerely, Le Grand Roi des CitrouillesTally-ho! 18:48, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete per WP:NOTDIR #5 ("non-encyclopedic cross-categorizations"). Deor (talk) 19:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep Lists are an important part of an encylopedia, and this one is no less trivial than many others. MarkSG (talk) 19:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete. Indiscriminate collection of information. The link between criterion and candidates is far too weak to warrant an article, and the scope is likely ridiculous. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 00:42, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
    Roi's right that it isn't an indiscriminate list. It's still a mix of the obvious and the trivial, but it's not indiscriminate. Mandsford (talk) 01:26, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. And improve sourcing through regular editing. As nom says some are obvious but other are not; clarify and source. A list of notable bands, as defined because each has their own article is only so interesting to me but my taste is hardly a reason to keep or delete. If we have proof that no one is interested I would be more compelled but this does seem to be a useful list to those who are curious as well as those who study these things as part of their music-related professions. Banjeboi 00:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 21:38, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

List of Bank Identification Numbers

List of Bank Identification Numbers (|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

The whole article is full of unverified original research--people add one or two cards at a time, it seems, with no sources. This makes me believe they look at their own credit card(s), see them not listed, then list them themselves. This article is useful, but largely unverifiable. Sydius (talk) 17:49, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —Cliff smith talk 17:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete - fails WP:OR, WP:NOTE, WP:RS. I'm also not really sure what the point of the article is either! -- JediLofty UserTalk 18:47, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
The list can be useful to organizations who wish to know from which bank a card has been issued as a part of fraud prevention (IE, if the card was issued by a bank in the United States, but the IP address's country is thought to be Russia, it might be a case of fraud). --Sydius (talk) 18:55, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Sure... but be honest, if you were looking for that information would you look in an encyclopedia? ;-) -- JediLofty UserTalk 19:00, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Hah, actually, it's how I found it--I wanted exactly what this list could provide. I can't trust it without sources, though; not to mention, it's a bit messy and I do agree that it is out of place in encyclopedia. My primary concern, though, is all the original research/lack of sources. --Sydius (talk) 19:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
The trouble is it's useful isn't a valid criteria for inclusion without reliable sources. -- JediLofty UserTalk 10:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Comment - A source was added, http://www.iinvestigate.net/secure/creditcard.shtml, but I don't think this is a reliable source. --Sydius (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete Lists are bad enough, but a list of numbers seems especially out of place in an encyclopedia. There must be some other website that provides this information. Northwestgnome (talk) 21:58, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - passes WP:NOTE, WP:NPOV, WP:V. The argument to keep it is that this information does not appear to be compliled by a more authorative source or otherwise readily accessible. The recently added citation is a partial replacement at best. Neither my bank or VISA provide a similar list. This information constitutes a valuable fraud prevention tool, allowing a merchant to identify which bank needs to be contacted for timely transaction inquiries.
    The information is verifiable (WP:V) either on the bank's website or by phoning the bank directly. The information is neutral (WP:NPOV). And it passes (teniously) WP:NOTE. The article would be stronger and more authoritative if sources were cited. But it's positive utility argues that we should keep it unless a more authoritative source can replace it or significant harm can be argued. A disclaimer regarding citations continues to be appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iredato (talk • contribs) 22:21, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
Unless we can provide good citations, though, I think it fails to meet the requirements for a Wikipedia article, no matter how useful (and I agree that it is invaluable) it may be. Perhaps it would be more appropriately listed someplace else, with a link at the bottom of the credit card number page. --Sydius (talk) 22:24, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
A link at the bottom of the credit card number page would be a reasonable alternative if this article is voted to not meet Wikipedia standards. -- iredato
  • Delete subject fails our notability criteria. not to mention that it isn't remotely an encyclopedic subject. Information isn't remotely cited to reliable 3rd party sources (or any at all for that matter). Jasynnash2 (talk) 10:22, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep - Thinking that a list of numbers are "out of place in an encyclopedia" is incorrect. See List of prime numbers. I feel that the "An encyclopedia should, by definition, be informative and useful to its readers" portion of WP:ITSUSEFUL is satisfied enough to keep it around. Exit2DOS2000•T•C• 11:26, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Regardless of WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS prime numbers are at least marginally notable whereas this list has no such claim. Prime numbers will always and forever be the same. The numbers on this list could/probably have/and probably will again change. Information is already suitably covered in an encyclopedic manner here. Jasynnash2 (talk) 11:43, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Delete, unfortunately despite that this is a very useful list, it fails WP:NOR, WP:LC, and various other guidelines, policies, and essays. Stifle (talk) 13:55, 21 August 2008 (UTC)

List of newspapers in North Korea

List of newspapers in North Korea (|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Pointless list for only two newspapers, one of which is a red link. Article has seen no real development since it's creation over two years ago, and is redundant to Cat:Newspapers published in North Korea. Contested prod. PC78 (talk) 18:08, 16 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. —Cliff smith talk 18:38, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Keep. Being incomplete is not a reason for deletion. As one might expect, there are several other newspapers published in North Korea. See ko:분류:조선민주주의인민공화국의 신문 for several names. Perhaps someone could add English transliterations for the newspapers listed there to the English list. --Eastmain (talk) 01:36, 17 August 2008 (UTC)
    • Well, you linked to a category on the Korean Wiki, and not a heavily populated one at that. "Being incomplete" was not the reason for the nomination; being of limited use and having limited scope for expansion was. If expanding this list simply means adding a few more red links and external links, then that's all the more reason to get rid. Though perhaps it might be an idea to merge it into a single List of newspapers in Korea?. PC78 (talk) 18:08, 17 August 2008 (UTC)

List of available U.S. stamp denominations

List of available U.S. stamp denominations (|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

This article has not cited any sources for over a year. I finally found a reliable source [1], which makes it clear that the denominations listed on this page are wildly out of date. This article will probably never be anything substantially more than the table on that page, and will likely suffer from neglect and become outdated and hence useless. Wikipedia is not a directory and Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. If this article is kept, at a minimum it must be rewritten to reflect currently available denominations, and it should be tidied up with some connecting prose so that it's at least a little better than the table from the USPS site. It seems to me, however, that it could easily be deleted and replaced with a link to the relevant USPS page, which will always be more up-to-date than Wikipedia can be. —Bkell (talk) 00:41, 14 August 2008 (UTC)

  • Comment I have to believe a properly sourced (and accurate!) version of this could be merged somewhere; it seems that we would have a logical article where this information would fit. If that were the case, a redirect from this title would be in order. UltraExactZZ Claims ~ Evidence 18:27, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
  • Once upon a time I think there was a sentence or two somewhere (maybe WP:NOT) which specifically gave bus schedules or train timetables as information which was not appropriate for Wikipedia, but I can't find it now. If anyone knows what I'm talking about, I would appreciate a link, to satisfy my frustration and because I think this is quite similar. —Bkell (talk) 21:47, 14 August 2008 (UTC)
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jerry talk ¤ count/logs 23:39, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

List of high schools in Washington by WIAA league alignment

List of high schools in Washington by WIAA league alignment (|talk|history|links|watch|logs) (delete) – (View AfD)

Wikipedia already has a List of high schools in Washington, but why do we need to get even more specific with a list by WIAA league? WP:SALAT says that even though the possibilities of stand-alone lists are infinite, we should also limit the amount of lists. Besides, the article consists of just headings and templates so it really isn't that encyclopedic. Tavix (talk) 20:13, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, PeterSymonds (talk) 19:58, 16 August 2008 (UTC)
Could not update stat
UP