- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 21:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
List of Malayalam songs recorded by S. Janaki
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- List of Malayalam songs recorded by S. Janaki ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NLIST. This is a non notable intersection, virtually unsourced 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Lists, and India. Shellwood ( talk) 19:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 16:41, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
 | If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}}; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}}. |
- Strongly Keep - This article is well referenced and such songs listings are well accepted in wikipedia. Previously, similar articles were up for deletion and have successfully survived deletion discussion. So, I Don't think when a singer sings more than 500 songs in a language and all of them are found in a reliable database (malayalachalachithram.com), that list can't be non-notable intersection. Abbasulu ( talk) 21:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Question, what makes this list different in notability to, for example,
List of songs recorded by Robbie Williams?
Elemimele (
talk) 22:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- (i.e. what I'm getting at is how do we establish notability of lists of songs; these two singers, Robbie Williams and S. Janaki, are both clearly notable, both have enormous lists of songs that wouldn't fit easily in their articles, so what is it that we're looking at, when we decide if the list is okay as a stand-alone?) Elemimele ( talk) 22:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Keepper Elemimele. MasterMatt12 💬 ● Contributions 02:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)- Changing vote to delete I looked at some more songs on the list and I couldn't find any sources for them except the fact that they exist, I originally said keep because I found some sources for some of the songs and assumed that it would be like that for the rest of them. MasterMatt12 💬 ● Contributions 16:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comment - this article is 99% unsourced. Keep !votes need to address this if they want to form a valid keep rationale. It can't stand as is.
Sergecross73
msg me 16:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- You can't expect a singer with 1000 songs, every songs must have a reference, the most referencrd article has less than 500 references. You can search each and every song in
https://malayalachalachithram.com and
https://msidb.org.
Abbasulu (
talk) 17:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- If it can't be sourced, it can't be on Wikipedia, full-stop. You can't expect Wikipedia to keep unsourced content on it. You need a different argument than this. Sergecross73 msg me 18:01, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- If you can't be bothered sourcing it then don't make the article in the first place. The whole point of Wikipedia is that we cite our sources, not expect others to go out and go somewhere else for a source FishandChipper 🐟 🍟 18:49, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- You can't expect a singer with 1000 songs, every songs must have a reference, the most referencrd article has less than 500 references. You can search each and every song in
https://malayalachalachithram.com and
https://msidb.org.
Abbasulu (
talk) 17:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- I completely agree with Serge here and I hasten to add that WP:V is a core Wikipedia policy, which all editors must do their best to abide to. Any information or, for that matter, articles that cannot be reliably sourced must be deleted. I can't think of any valid exceptions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:40, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Strong Delete You can not have WP:SIGCOV without WP:V. It a core tenet. This is currently a unsourced (mostly) structured list that fails WP:NLIST. Every single entry needs to referenced otherwise it cannot be on Wikipedia. We do not store unreferenced content, and what references are they are clickbait sites, sites similar discogs and IMDB and several references that fail WP:SPS. It is absolutely woefully inadequate as a list on Wikipedia. Changed from delete to strong delete. scope_creep Talk 13:49, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Note to closing admin - Abbasulu has canvassed quite a lot of editors
see here from 14:54 on 16 Jan onwards. I believe that this violates
WP:CANVAS as the editor is notifying a very large number of editors that they know will !vote keep at the 3 AfDs and could potentially have a big impact on the outcome.
Spiderone
(Talk to Spider) 16:01, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
-
Comment: I just noticed
Canvassing by author Abbasulu. This is not the first time they did this,
see also. --
আফতাবুজ্জামান (
talk) 16:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
-
- Strong Delete - As with almost every other list you they have made this one fails both WP:SIGCOV and WP:V. And then to turn around and tell people to do the sourcing themselves? It's not only rude it's insulting FishandChipper 🐟 🍟 17:16, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I'm really worried here that when someone does some canvassing, the debate becomes emotional, and there is naturally strong indignation against the side that did the canvassing. We must not let this get in the way of making the right decision. There is little doubt that the singer herself is notable by WP standards, and there's little doubt that she sang this lot, and that it could be verified if anyone can be bothered to go through the truly prodigious amount of searching that would be necessary to find a source for every entry (not prodigious because it's hard to verify any particular song; prodigious because she sang 10,000 of the things). I asked above, what are our criteria for splitting out someone's discography into a list separate to their article. I haven't had a reply. We can't cram all this lot back into the article on Janaki herself. Are we deleting to make a point? Do we want a discography at all? Is it practical, given how much she sang? What is the best way of helping our readers?
Elemimele (
talk) 19:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- @ Elemimele the likely answer is WP:NOTDATABASE. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- One of three things would need to happen. First option would be that someone works on this in draft or user space until the article is in an acceptable state and then afterwards returns the article to mainspace. If that can't happen then a second option would be trimming down this list so that it only contains entries that can be reliably sourced, the downside to that would be that it wouldn't be an exhaustive list any more. The third option is that consensus decides, because of WP:NOT or otherwise, that the topic just is not suitable for inclusion in an encyclopaedia. The artist in question is no doubt notable but that does not necessarily mean that an exhaustive list of their songs is a notable topic itself. Another example of this sort of situation is in sports. Anyone that has heard of Lionel Messi would agree that Messi is notable. This does not mean, however, that List of football matches featuring Lionel Messi would be an appropriate topic, even though such a topic probably could be reliably sourced. Hope that helps. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm not sure why I was canvassed to this discussion, but "if someone asks you to provide a source, you're expected to provide a source" is such a basic fundamental of Wikipedia that it doesn't even warrant discussion. ‑ Iridescent 19:47, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm happy to accept deletion per Timtrent's comment about not-database. But I'd point out (again) that the AfD instructions are clear: it is the job of the nominator to check that sourcing does not exist. This is obviously in flat contradiction to the requirement that articles in main-space must have supporting sources. To get round this conflict, I feel there's a case for moving articles and lists that are almost certainly verifiably correct, but which are currently inadequately sourced, into draft-space rather than deleting. But I'm not recommending it in this case because 10,000 songs is too many to list, and I think her story would be better told by concentrating on the highlights. Elemimele ( talk) 21:39, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom and above editors. Onel5969 TT me 14:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- 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.
- 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. Liz Read! Talk! 21:25, 21 January 2023 (UTC)
List of Malayalam songs recorded by S. Janaki
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- List of Malayalam songs recorded by S. Janaki ( | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – ( View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
Fails WP:NLIST. This is a non notable intersection, virtually unsourced 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 19:06, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music, Lists, and India. Shellwood ( talk) 19:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. --- DOOMSDAYER520 ( TALK| CONTRIBS) 16:41, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
|
| If you came here because someone asked you to, or you read a message on another website, please note that this is
not a majority vote, but instead a discussion among Wikipedia contributors. Wikipedia has
policies and guidelines regarding the encyclopedia's content, and
consensus (agreement) is gauged based on the merits of the arguments, not by counting votes.
However, you are invited to participate and your opinion is welcome. Remember to assume good faith on the part of others and to sign your posts on this page by adding ~~~~ at the end. Note: Comments may be tagged as follows: suspected single-purpose accounts:{{subst:
spa|username}}; suspected
canvassed users: {{subst:
canvassed|username}}; accounts blocked for
sockpuppetry: {{subst:
csm|username}} or {{subst:
csp|username}}. |
- Strongly Keep - This article is well referenced and such songs listings are well accepted in wikipedia. Previously, similar articles were up for deletion and have successfully survived deletion discussion. So, I Don't think when a singer sings more than 500 songs in a language and all of them are found in a reliable database (malayalachalachithram.com), that list can't be non-notable intersection. Abbasulu ( talk) 21:22, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- Question, what makes this list different in notability to, for example,
List of songs recorded by Robbie Williams?
Elemimele (
talk) 22:30, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
- (i.e. what I'm getting at is how do we establish notability of lists of songs; these two singers, Robbie Williams and S. Janaki, are both clearly notable, both have enormous lists of songs that wouldn't fit easily in their articles, so what is it that we're looking at, when we decide if the list is okay as a stand-alone?) Elemimele ( talk) 22:31, 14 January 2023 (UTC)
Keepper Elemimele. MasterMatt12 💬 ● Contributions 02:17, 15 January 2023 (UTC)- Changing vote to delete I looked at some more songs on the list and I couldn't find any sources for them except the fact that they exist, I originally said keep because I found some sources for some of the songs and assumed that it would be like that for the rest of them. MasterMatt12 💬 ● Contributions 16:15, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comment - this article is 99% unsourced. Keep !votes need to address this if they want to form a valid keep rationale. It can't stand as is.
Sergecross73
msg me 16:56, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- You can't expect a singer with 1000 songs, every songs must have a reference, the most referencrd article has less than 500 references. You can search each and every song in
https://malayalachalachithram.com and
https://msidb.org.
Abbasulu (
talk) 17:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- If it can't be sourced, it can't be on Wikipedia, full-stop. You can't expect Wikipedia to keep unsourced content on it. You need a different argument than this. Sergecross73 msg me 18:01, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- If you can't be bothered sourcing it then don't make the article in the first place. The whole point of Wikipedia is that we cite our sources, not expect others to go out and go somewhere else for a source FishandChipper 🐟 🍟 18:49, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- You can't expect a singer with 1000 songs, every songs must have a reference, the most referencrd article has less than 500 references. You can search each and every song in
https://malayalachalachithram.com and
https://msidb.org.
Abbasulu (
talk) 17:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)
- I completely agree with Serge here and I hasten to add that WP:V is a core Wikipedia policy, which all editors must do their best to abide to. Any information or, for that matter, articles that cannot be reliably sourced must be deleted. I can't think of any valid exceptions. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 12:40, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Strong Delete You can not have WP:SIGCOV without WP:V. It a core tenet. This is currently a unsourced (mostly) structured list that fails WP:NLIST. Every single entry needs to referenced otherwise it cannot be on Wikipedia. We do not store unreferenced content, and what references are they are clickbait sites, sites similar discogs and IMDB and several references that fail WP:SPS. It is absolutely woefully inadequate as a list on Wikipedia. Changed from delete to strong delete. scope_creep Talk 13:49, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Note to closing admin - Abbasulu has canvassed quite a lot of editors
see here from 14:54 on 16 Jan onwards. I believe that this violates
WP:CANVAS as the editor is notifying a very large number of editors that they know will !vote keep at the 3 AfDs and could potentially have a big impact on the outcome.
Spiderone
(Talk to Spider) 16:01, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
-
Comment: I just noticed
Canvassing by author Abbasulu. This is not the first time they did this,
see also. --
আফতাবুজ্জামান (
talk) 16:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
-
- Strong Delete - As with almost every other list you they have made this one fails both WP:SIGCOV and WP:V. And then to turn around and tell people to do the sourcing themselves? It's not only rude it's insulting FishandChipper 🐟 🍟 17:16, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Comment I'm really worried here that when someone does some canvassing, the debate becomes emotional, and there is naturally strong indignation against the side that did the canvassing. We must not let this get in the way of making the right decision. There is little doubt that the singer herself is notable by WP standards, and there's little doubt that she sang this lot, and that it could be verified if anyone can be bothered to go through the truly prodigious amount of searching that would be necessary to find a source for every entry (not prodigious because it's hard to verify any particular song; prodigious because she sang 10,000 of the things). I asked above, what are our criteria for splitting out someone's discography into a list separate to their article. I haven't had a reply. We can't cram all this lot back into the article on Janaki herself. Are we deleting to make a point? Do we want a discography at all? Is it practical, given how much she sang? What is the best way of helping our readers?
Elemimele (
talk) 19:34, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- @ Elemimele the likely answer is WP:NOTDATABASE. 🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦 20:06, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- One of three things would need to happen. First option would be that someone works on this in draft or user space until the article is in an acceptable state and then afterwards returns the article to mainspace. If that can't happen then a second option would be trimming down this list so that it only contains entries that can be reliably sourced, the downside to that would be that it wouldn't be an exhaustive list any more. The third option is that consensus decides, because of WP:NOT or otherwise, that the topic just is not suitable for inclusion in an encyclopaedia. The artist in question is no doubt notable but that does not necessarily mean that an exhaustive list of their songs is a notable topic itself. Another example of this sort of situation is in sports. Anyone that has heard of Lionel Messi would agree that Messi is notable. This does not mean, however, that List of football matches featuring Lionel Messi would be an appropriate topic, even though such a topic probably could be reliably sourced. Hope that helps. Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 21:10, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete. I'm not sure why I was canvassed to this discussion, but "if someone asks you to provide a source, you're expected to provide a source" is such a basic fundamental of Wikipedia that it doesn't even warrant discussion. ‑ Iridescent 19:47, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- I'm happy to accept deletion per Timtrent's comment about not-database. But I'd point out (again) that the AfD instructions are clear: it is the job of the nominator to check that sourcing does not exist. This is obviously in flat contradiction to the requirement that articles in main-space must have supporting sources. To get round this conflict, I feel there's a case for moving articles and lists that are almost certainly verifiably correct, but which are currently inadequately sourced, into draft-space rather than deleting. But I'm not recommending it in this case because 10,000 songs is too many to list, and I think her story would be better told by concentrating on the highlights. Elemimele ( talk) 21:39, 16 January 2023 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom and above editors. Onel5969 TT me 14:52, 20 January 2023 (UTC)
- 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.