Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of contemporary and crossover bass-baritones

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 all Nakon 21:15, 1 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of contemporary and crossover bass-baritones[edit]

Overly broad and unnecessary listcruft. AniMate 05:32, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am also nominating the following related pages because they are also overly broad and listcrufty:

Delete. Per nom. Speedied twice as no-context and nonsense (although I disagree with the application of the latter criterion). Dethme0w (talk) 05:45, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment What is wrong with this article?

Ineversigninsodonotmessageme (talk) 05:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Ineversigninsodonotmessageme[reply]

As I said in my nomination, it is an overly broad list. Contemporary music and Crossover music are pretty difficult and subjective genres to define, and the potential for a list that is both massive and subjective doesn't seem to be a very productive article. AniMate 05:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ohhhh ok, so if I narrowed it down to only Crossover music, it won't be deleted? Ineversigninsodonotmessageme (talk) 05:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Ineversigninsodonotmessageme[reply]

Not necessarily. It's still a pretty broad genre, and I'm not sure that it adds anything to the encyclopedia. You can try and improve the list, but you should also present reasons here why you believe it should be kept. AniMate 06:01, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Ineversigninsodonotmessageme (talk) 06:07, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Ineversigninsodonotmessageme[reply]

Delete also entirely original research, as I see no evidence that there is any way to verify that these are bass-baritone singers. Also, as noted, the basic premise of the list is insanely broad. Contemporary= modern and crossover= fits in two musical genres. This is not a very informative list, based on that criteria. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 07:15, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as hopelessly OR/POV. --MCB (talk) 07:42, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Again, why are the other articles going to be deleted as well? They have been around for a while, so why all of a sudden are they candiates for deletion?

Ineversigninsodonotmessageme (talk) 21:14, 25 January 2008 (UTC)Ineversigninsodonotmessageme[reply]

- Because a) The reasoning for deleting them is identical to deleting the Bass-baritone article (inadequatly broad criteria; no way to verify content) and b) Length of stay is no measure of the quality of an article. Wikipedia doesn't really operate on a seniority system. Lots of stuff goes under the radar, and all articles are subject to the same criteria, even those no one noticed until now. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 23:13, 25 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Looks like original research. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 22:20, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all as original research and mostly unverifiable. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 22:32, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep I strongly disagree with the pages being deleted. Is there another reason why they should be deleted besides due to "lack of criterion" or "lack of references"? I also think its a personal attack against the pages because some of the administrators were against them since day one. Ineversigninsodonotmessageme (talk) 03:27, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Ineversigninsodonotmessageme[reply]

Hi, INSISDNMM (heh). The main problem with these lists is that they are incredibly difficult, if not impossible to verify to WP's standards. It's not enough to put someone's name on one of these lists and say "I know that he/she is a <whatever>". Any information added must already have been published in a reliable, third-party source to ensure factual accuracy - which is not the case for nearly all the singers listed here. I tagged some of the lists as unreferenced a while back in the hope that someone would add the required references - but it seems not to have happened (in fact, someone seems to have purposefully removed the tags). These lists simply can't stay on WP in their current form.
Edit: I don't suppose that there's any reason that you couldn't request that the lists be copied to your userspace if they are deleted, to enable you to work on them some more and get them up to scratch in terms of refs. --Kurt Shaped Box (talk) 20:49, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kurt, I know what you are saying about the pages not having much references, and some people putting their favorite "pop" stars on the forms. But like I said before, there were and still are some references on the Contralto and Mezzo-Soprano pages as well. How about someone or myself make the pages all over again, starting from stratch?

Ineversigninsodonotmessageme (talk) 20:58, 31 January 2008 (UTC)Ineversigninsodonotmessageme[reply]

Delete as unmaintainable original research. There is no cabal. Deltabeignet (talk) 19:39, 31 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.