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 - non-admin closure - Peripitus (Talk) 12:07, 18 July 2008 (UTC) reply

List of hard rock musicians

List of hard rock musicians (  | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) ( delete) – ( View log)

Previously nominated in April. Passed per WP:CLN, i.e. a list may be developed further than a category. However, since then, no changes have been made except new bare list entries. A quick glance reveals REO Speedwagon and Therapy?, definitively not hard rock bands. Category:hard rock groups is appropriate in part because the auto-link from each article (or conspicuous lack thereof) helps filter and develop the proper list. Here however we see a tendency to wp:listcruft with little prospect and no progress of comprehensively adding cross-reference information, blurbs, or such.

Article may be recreated without prejudice after deletion by copying category contents. So long as intent is to add value. Potatoswatter ( talk) 13:59, 6 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• Keep It's a manageable list with a direct lead criteria. Open expand. If this is nominated then every single list found at Category:Lists of musicians by genre should be nominated for the same reasons. Most them have already been AfD'd at least once and all are still here for several reasons... it's manageable, it's expandable, many key/important hard rock acts are missing the category in the category list, which means not only is the list an easier refernce to review - it's a more accurate reference as well. Libs ( talk) 14:13, 6 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• The lead criterion references hard rock, which says this:

  Hard rock is a variation of rock music which has its earliest roots in mid-1960s garage and psychedelic rock. It is typified by a heavy use of distorted electric guitars, bass guitar, keyboards and drums. The term "hard rock" is often used as an umbrella term for genres such as Alternative, Grunge, heavy metal and Punk in order to distinguish them from pop rock.

  The problem is that this includes nearly all rock that isn't "pop" and then some that is: distorted guitar is mighty popular. Meanwhile musicians are virtually guaranteed to fall into another list, such as List of heavy metal bands—an exemplary list. Are there some bands best typified as hard rock? Sure... Deep Purple, Blue Oyster Cult. Do Boston and David Bowie also belong? Well, technically. But tell a record store clerk you like hard rock such as Pat Benatar, and the guitar distortion will be curtailed. And don't get me started on Bijelo Dugme.
• Also, many of the Category:Lists of musicians by genre (ie, all of the half dozen I just randomly clicked) are substantially improved or contain redlinks, so I disagree with equating this one to the rest. Potatoswatter ( talk) 21:34, 6 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 00:19, 7 July 2008 (UTC) reply
• Keep As previously mentioned. There is no reason to delete this article unless we go ahead and delete every "List of X bands" article on Wikipedia. Anger22 ( Talk 2 22) 02:02, 7 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• Also as mentioned, nearly all the others are superior to this one. There is no slippery slope. Potatoswatter ( talk) 04:23, 7 July 2008 (UTC) reply
• Also, this argument is WP:OTHERSTUFF. Potatoswatter ( talk) 17:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• Keep on the grounds that the previous AFD was only closed on April 30, so it's too soon to renominate. 23skidoo ( talk) 14:21, 7 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• However, edit history shows over 100 edits since then. Article development isn't stalled, it's flawed. Potatoswatter ( talk) 17:52, 7 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• Comment The nominator is correct that this lazy list does nothing that a category doesn't do already. It's nothing more than a list of articles on Wikipedia, which is already accomplished by a category, so I see no reason to say keep. However, the advantage is that this would be easier to find than a category would be, due to a flaw in Wikipedia's search engine, so I won't urge a delete. If a search ever leads directly to a category-- i.e., we type in "hard rock musicians" and it leads to "Category:Hard Rock Groups"-- then complacent lists like this would be the first casualty. Mandsford ( talk) 16:01, 7 July 2008 (UTC) reply
• listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Rock/Deletions. Potatoswatter ( talk) 20:25, 8 July 2008 (UTC) reply
• Request that discussion be extended, since only three opinions so far, mainly being "otherstuff." Potatoswatter ( talk) 23:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC) reply
  • Comment I agree that there is an element of otherstuff here, and that the question could benefit from further discussion,

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Skomorokh 03:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• • Comment Again I say it's a maintainable list. Not enough time following last afd. Libs ( talk) 03:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC) reply
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. — Potatoswatter ( talk) 07:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC) reply
• Keep per my comments at the first AFD. There is no valid reason to delete this article. The nominator might not see any prospects of this article being improved but that's merely impatience. -- Bardin ( talk) 14:44, 17 July 2008 (UTC) reply

• There are two solid reasons to delete. One is that improving this article would necessitate starting from scratch because of the existing cruft. A better way to form this list would be to copy from categories such as Category:American alternative rock music groups. (Does anyone there not belong here? Is that list 100% consistently hard rock?) So this list as-is does not contribute to a potential improved list.
• The second reason is that it's not maintainable. For almost fifty years hard rock has been the "music of the people" in much of the world due to cheap production/performance requirements and overall popularity. The scope of this list is such that it needs to be broken into smaller, categorized lists, which as it happens has already been done and those lists are already in the improvement stage. Now, a list of hard rock genres would be nice, and could easily be condensed from hard rock. Potatoswatter ( talk) 15:51, 17 July 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.