Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of rock instrumentals

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 bd2412 T 22:14, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

List of rock instrumentals[edit]

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

Delete Absurdly incomplete list with nebulous criteria Cosprings (talk) 01:10, 11 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
What's nebulous, the definition of rock music, or the definition of instrumental? Or somehow the two when they intersect? That a list is incomplete isn't grounds for deletion. I see that it only contains instrumentals by bands that have articles too (and many of the instrumentals have their own articles), so I don't think it's indiscriminate. Also, there is Category:Rock instrumentals; this list provides a function that the category cannot by organizing by musician. postdlf (talk) 16:28, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As Postdlf points out, instrumental rock songs (i.e., those that are a melody only, with no lyrics, such as "Jessica" by the Allman Brothers) are considered notable enough that we organize them into a category Category:Rock instrumentals. I agree with Post's other point, which is that a category is pretty limited in this case, since it has no information to identify a musician. Instrumentals are more difficult to navigate to than songs that do have lyrics, because there is nothing in them that suggests a title. Mandsford 19:02, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) ×2 Delete Way too loose a criterion for inclusion. "List of [genre] songs" is just asking for trouble since it will invariably include duplication, redlinks, etc. — all of these arguments successfully got List of doo-wop songs deleted. Each song would need a source to identify it as a rock instrmuental, and we'd invariably have dozens of edit wars over inclusion/exclusion. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 19:03, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't think the doo-wap songs list is an apt comparison, because this isn't purporting to be a list of all songs of a particular genre, but rather all songs of a particular type...within a particular genre. If it was just a genre list, it would be better served by lists of artists who recorded music in that genre to avoid recapitulating entire discographies. My comment below addresses the issue of when genre classifications may be disputed. postdlf (talk) 16:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep While defining what constitutes a doo wop song may be open to interpretation, I don't think there's going to much argument over what constitutes an instrumental. Does it have vocals? No? Then it's in. Furthermore, while a list like this will never be complete, that not a good reason to not even try. Robman94 (talk) 22:50, 8 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, but there could well be a dispute over what constitutes "rock". --Metropolitan90 (talk) 03:10, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  - Should we then also delete as unverifiable Category:Rock musicians and Category:Rock albums? Regardless, lists have two wonderful features: 1) they can be annotated, such as to show disagreement over inclusion, and 2) they are not mutually exclusive, such that an entry could apply in multiple lists if sources classify it in different ways. So a dispute in reliable sources over such a classification is not a bar to listing, it is something to note in the list. postdlf (talk) 03:17, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 20:15, 9 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 01:05, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

My position is keep, if that wasn't clear. postdlf (talk) 01:26, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Time is tight, so run, don't walk to vote keep to save this article from being wiped out. These are a lot easier to categorize than doo wop songs.[1][2]. Plus we've got Grammy Award for Best Rock Instrumental Performance, so obviously somebody knows a rock instrumental when they hear one. Clarityfiend (talk) 04:48, 15 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: As per precedent List of doo-wop songs. This is better off served as a category rather than a list.. JacksOrion (talk) 11:39, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Keep This list meets current WP notability guidelines for lists:WP:NOTESAL as there are a great many sources that discuss Rock Instrumentals as a group. (Someone in the know should add the most reliable ones). Additionally the argument that a category is sufficient is not a valid AfD argument WP:NOTDUP for deletion. The list would be improved significantly if individual unlinked entries were sourced. --Mike Cline (talk) 20:23, 22 January 2011 (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.