Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of male singers

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 delete. Petros471 15:47, 23 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of male singers

Horribly incomplete, and horribly unmaintainable (although, what's here and what isn't puts several of Wikipedia's systemic biases on front street. FuriousFreddy 13:24, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete - listcruft - list that will go on and on and on - Peripitus (Talk) 13:33, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete I'm an inclusionist and also list-friendly, but this lacks thought behind it and will combine extreme incompleteness with extreme length. I admire the hours of work that have gone into this, but it's not Wiki-worthy. Is there any way for the author(s) to save this? Would breaking it into separate articles, each limited chronologically and categorically, help? I'm thinking of separate articles along the lines of "Male Carnatic Singers 1920-1947" "Male Canratic Singers 1947-2000" "Female Country Singers -1945" etc. Or am I trying to save something hopelessly listcrufty? Interlingua ^talk 13:56, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete far too broad of a list and also asking for vandalism. Yanksox ^(talk) 14:01, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete unmaintainable listcruft. --Arnzy ^{(whats up?)} 14:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete awful - CrazyRussian talk/email 14:28, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Keep First up, yes I'm partisan. Ok, so both the female list and the male need attention, which is what they've been getting. They were badly thought out when they were started, long before I came to them, but they're being shaken down albeit slowly. "Horribly incomplete" is not, I contend, a justification deleting the thing, it's a reason for fulfilling its potential. And "unmaintainable" is surely a judgement call for whoever's prepared to undergo the maintenance. It takes time, and that's also what it's been getting. I both have a useful aide memoire and cross-reference (otherwise clearly wouldn't have waste time on them). I would have thought that this is exactly the organic process that WP thrives on. I do have an issue with the inclusion of selected portraits which have recently appeared (along similar policy lines of not embellishing disambiguation pages). Cain Mosni 15:31, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
  • You can't be serious. Perhaps I should elaborate:

    "Horribly incomplete" means "this article only lists a minor fraction of the male singers who already have Wikipedia articles. Not to mention the fact that there are scores upon scores of male singers who don't yet have Wikipedia articles, but should because of notability. Therefore, the list is grossly incomplete."

    "Highly unmaintainable" means "it goes against the logic of common sense to suppose that theis list will ever be anything approaching complete; it wouldn't even be able to keep up with the rate at which new articles are added ot the Wikipedia. Therefore, it is very much unmaintainable." --FuriousFreddy 15:41, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete. This is what Categories are for. —Cuiviénen 16:05, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. What next, list of male persons?--MichaelMaggs 16:16, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete --Charlesknight 17:14, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Too broad even for a category. –Abe Dashiell ^(t/c) 20:52, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Strong Delete Why people create articles they know will never be complete is beyond me. Danny Lilithborne 22:36, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Might as well start up a List of American men. That'd be about as user-friendly, too. -- Captain Disdain 23:09, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete use categories instead - this can go on indefinitely into the past and future. Jammo (SM247) 23:23, 18 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete listcruft. —Khoikhoi 04:07, 19 June 2006 (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.