Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of albums longer than 70 minutes

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 delete. Geschichte (talk) 06:55, 31 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

List of albums longer than 70 minutes

[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)

Created in good faith following the deletion of several album-length-related categories (see Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2021 June 21#Category:70-minute and longer albums). However, I believe this does not meet WP:LISTCRIT, for many of the same reasons that the categories were deleted - basically that the length cutoff is arbitrary and non-defining. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 06:35, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Per nom. There must be thousands of albums longer than 70 minutes, and for the life of me, I can't see how it's defining in any way. I was playing this album yesterday. The run-time isn't important. What about double/triple albums? An unmanageable list. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 06:44, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
No objection as creator of the page / CFD closer, but let me ping Mikus (talk · contribs) who created the categories and Marcocapelle, Grutness who suggested converting to a list.– Fayenatic London 07:09, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom. A List of albums with the longest running time would work, but 70 minutes is totally arbitrary. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:11, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Still think that listifying is better than outright deletion, though the arbitrariness is a concern. IIRC a standard compact disc has a maximum running time of 74 minutes - would that be a less arbitrary cutoff? Grutness...wha? 07:24, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what the limitations are for a single CD, but I have several that clock in at almost 80 minutes, with this one, for example, being 78 minutes plus. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:46, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your examples highlight another issue with the list - live albums, compilations, and greatest hits albums. As collections of existing material, it's typical of them to be longer than studio albums, so their length isn't even an unusual/notable characteristic. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 08:23, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 07:42, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Moving it to List of albums with the longest running time in combination with a stricter cut-off would be the most practical solution. Marcocapelle (talk) 07:45, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, per WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. There would be literally thousands of artists on this list considering most LPs on CD have a maximum length of 80 minutes. Ajf773 (talk) 08:40, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per many of the arguments above - WP:INDISCRIMINATE, 70 minutes is arbitrary, non-defining and not particularly rare when you look at the history of recorded music. Sergecross73 msg me 11:24, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - again, too indiscriminate of a list. Remember that, in the era of Compact Discs, the max a CD could hold was usually around 75 minutes or so, and bands, in cooperation with their labels, would try and cram in as much music as possible, as close to that 75-minute threshold as possible. Of course, now you don't see much of that anymore in the digital/streaming era, with most albums topping at around only 40 minutes. --MuZemike 11:47, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - no WP:SIGCOV dealing with this as a group so fails WP:NLIST (I found one Drowned in Sound article). Criteria for inclusion is arbitrary and captures innumerable albums as noted by others. Vladimir.copic (talk) 13:24, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - To be fair, I can remember the beginning of the CD age when bands that were previously confined to 45 minutes on vinyl suddenly went nuts and made the news with long albums that crammed 77 minutes onto CDs. This may have been a newsworthy list if Wikipedia had existed in 1991. Today, I agree with everyone above on problems of arbitrary definitions and the "indiscriminate" issue. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 13:34, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. This might be of some interest if it was based on the technical limits of an LP or CD, but the entries here include two-LP or two-CD sets. There's no limit to how long an album can be if multi-disc sets can be considered (see this 200-CD, 240-hour set of Mozart's complete works). --Metropolitan90 (talk) 15:23, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- By the way, we already have lists of some unusually long LPs at Unusual types of gramophone records#Unusually long playing times, and CDs at Compact Disc Digital Audio#Storage capacity and playing time, which are based on albums exceeding the standard technical limits for those formats, not on multi-disc sets. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:18, 25 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is a category, not a list, and without coverage of such things, it's an indiscriminate, user-generated list. Walter Görlitz (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I am persuaded by the arguments above that this is WP:INDISCRIMINATE for reasons of having arbitrary WP:LISTCRITERIA as well as being too broad per WP:SALAT. TompaDompa (talk) 19:09, 24 August 2021 (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.