Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Spotify streaming records

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 keep‎. Eddie891 ^Talk _Work 02:06, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of Spotify streaming records[edit]

AfDs for this article:

Articles for deletion/List of Spotify streaming records

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Hello everybody. I'm not adept enough at spotting compliant articles from verifiable sources, but, despite the fact that the first list that I am nominating has already gone through an AfD where different arguments were presented and whose result was keep and the second list has more independent sources than the first, I notice that these two lists (List of Spotify streaming records and List of most-streamed artists on Spotify) are not comply with WP:CHARTS, because it clearly mentions that Spotify is not a reliable source, since it is a list belonging to a single retailer specific. Likewise, the source used for the most interesting tables (Spotify itself) is an excuse to "make more reliable" where the information came from (ChartMasters and kworb.net), sources that are unreliable because the first falls under WP:SPS, and there's no indication of where the figures are from; while the second mostly compiles airplay data from Mediabase along with normalized popularity values for tracks in the iTunes Store; in particular, the sales estimates page should not be cited under any circumstance, as the provided figures on the page are merely estimated and are not based on official data. So far I remain neutral regarding Spotify Charts, as they could be used in specific circumstances. Due to the abusive strategies to support the existence of these lists, I am opening this consultation to reach a consensus that I hope will result in deleting these two lists. Thanks. Santi (talk) 02:29, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs, Music, Internet, Websites, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 03:44, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Spotify is the largest music streaming service in the world. This list is quite essential because it gives a perspective of who the best-performing musicians in streaming sector are. We have List of best-selling albums or List of best-selling music artists to picture the most successful musicians in "sales" sector. Most importantly, this topic is covered by numerous independently notable sources[1][2][3][4]. WP:CHARTS is not a policy to cite whether a given topic warrants its own article, but WP:N is. This list clearly passes notability for standalone article. Bluesatellite (talk) 04:25, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
WP:CHARTS is about reliability of sources, not notability. It's about whether or not a chart should be put in an article. It doesn't have any bearing on whether a chart should have its own article. Sergecross73 msg me 04:38, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. The fact that the list is specific to one company is not a reason for deletion, as other similar lists such as Most Viewed Youtube Videos, etc. would have no grounds for deletion either. The general guidelines in WP:Charts are being defied in this instance, but the reason for these specific guidelines in the first place is questionable, and perhaps should have exceptions when information is made publicly available, like with YouTube and Spotify. Certain guidelines in WP:Charts, like a chart being static, should honestly be abolished as that defeats the point of an online encyclopedia in the first place. You are also correct in that there are aspects of kworb.net that are completely unreliable, and it should never be used as a cited source. However, whether or not its compilation features are used for a timely update is a moot point, as it can be easily fact-checked by going to the application itself. Spotify's desktop application has the streaming counts for every song over 1000 streams, updated daily, simply by going to the album or single for the song, and is very reliable. This article must be kept for its historical importance as well, as any user can view the history and see what some of the most aggregate streamed songs were in past years. The only part I can agree with (which User:Pollosito didn't mention) is that the subtopics for this article are excessive, and simply keeping the most important ones like "Most Streamed Songs", "Historical Most Streamed Songs" (very essential), or "Most Streamed Songs in a Single Day/Week" would suffice. Other categories, like the album-related ones are more dubious in their accuracy and ability to be updated appropriately, and perhaps should be deleted. I would also advocate that the article title be changed from "List of Spotify streaming records" back to "List of Most Streamed Songs on Spotify", as that should be the focal point of the article. OnlyEditSpotify (talk) 08:24, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. 100% agree to what has been said before. We have been through the same discussion two years ago and it was decided to keep the article, nothing has really changed since then. This information on this page are unique and relevant. I also agree to change the name back to "List of Most Streamed Songs on Spotify" and streamline the content to besser fit the topic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stenella (talk • contribs) 11:54, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: SINGLEVENDOR is a problem for sourcing as Serge said. In this case, both of these lists are sourced reliably to places like Billboard and Variety, so it gets a pass on these grounds. If it were only sourced to Spotify themself and no other publications had discussed the matter, then there'd be a problem. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 12:16, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: agree wiith OnlyEditSpotify's reasoning and I also support a rename back to List of most-streamed songs on Spotify — more descriptive, matches the existing List of most-streamed artists on Spotify. Crunchydillpickle🥒 (talk) 15:31, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep, as per QuietHere. ℛonherry☘ 16:58, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as above; further I don't think this is the right venue for a name change. microbiologyMarcus ^{(petri dish•growths)} 19:32, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I retract my statement for a name change. This may not be the appropriate place for that. Thank you to QuietHere for giving succinct reasoning.
OnlyEditSpotify (talk) 02:50, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: thank you all for your comments. I specifically nominated this to AfD because, from my perspective, the tables of these lists (especially 100 most-streaming songs and Most-monthly listeners) should only be supported by verifiable sources (e.g. official news or some trusted organization and quality, like Billboard and IFPI) as I saw on WP:CHARTS, but, due to arguments by users with professional experience on this Wikipedia and have GAs and FAs (specially Ronherry), I retract and recognize the arguments that are totally valid; I just want to be a little more professional and constructive with what I do, so I apologize. Thank you very much for taking the time; good luck on the Wiki. Santi (talk) 20:42, 7 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Bluesatellite (talk · contribs). Caleb Stanford (talk) 00:38, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy keep: Concur with OnlyEditSpotify and Bluesatellite. dxneo (talk) 05:24, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per Bluesatellite and rename per Crunchydillpickle. voorts (talk/contributions) 22:43, 10 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per Bluesatellite. LeviEdits (talk) 04:09, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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.