Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of punk bands

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The result was keep (AfD withdrawn by nom); non-admin closure. Funeral 19:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of punk bands[edit]

The list has no refs and it's easily replaceable with Category:Punk rock groups. Funeral 14:11, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and Merge. Per WP:CLS and here. Malinaccier (talk) 16:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and merge, with the aim of improving the list with summaries, something like list of important operas. For example:
…
- d.b.s. ( 1992-2001) – A melodic punk rock band formed in North Vancouver, British Columbia.
…
- Propagandhi ( 1986-present) – An anarchist punk rock/thrash band formed in Portage la Prairie, Manitoba.
…
- Television ( 1973-78, 1992-93, 2001-present) – An art punk band formed in New York City.
…

− Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 17:27, 3 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and merge per Malinaccier and Twas Now. Lists like this are important pieces of Wikipedia's list-based navigation system, and they provide the building blocks for better lists to be made out of them later. According to WP:CLS: lists may be enhanced with features not available to categories, but building a rudimentary list of links is a necessary first step in the construction of an enhanced list -- deleting link lists is a pointless waste of these building blocks, and unnecessarily pressures list builders into providing a larger initial commitment of effort whenever they wish to create a new list, which may be felt as a disincentive. Refs can be added to this list as they pop up in the punk band articles themselves. Making a list maker provide all the refs, or wait until the articles have them before creating the list, seems like the wrong approach -- it hampers development of useful lists. On the project-level (i.e., considering Wikipedia as a whole), it would be easier for all concerned if the references were provided at the article-level and then harvested by the listmakers. 'The Transhumanist 06:44, 4 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and merge - I agree with what everyone else has said so far. Seems to be the best thing to work with the information. matt91486 (talk) 18:50, 4 January 2008 (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.