Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Indonesian rock 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The result was Withdrawn WP:AGF Gnan garra 14:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of Indonesian rock bands[edit]

This list has remained orphaned for over two years - the links are not disambiguated - and other lists already have Indonesian musicians listed, and those found in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category_talk:Indonesian_rock_music_groups do not even coincide. it serves no useful purpose Satu Suro 14:54, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Indonesia-related deletion discussions. —Satu Suro 05:51, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:15, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 12:15, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per nominator. But, I think we need List of Indonesian pop-rock rap bands . Can someone please create?--Merbabu (talk) 13:27, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Useless list, none of the links match the category. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 17:27, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep There is no reason to delete an article/list that is crappy if the subject is notable. If we were to delete this article, and not articles like List of British punk bands, it would be a case of systemic bias on our part. By deleting this, we would be saying that either Indonesia isn't notable or rock bands are not notable, something that has not been supported by the consensus of the community. I'll go through and clean the article up right now, but AfD isn't the way to handle a poorly-written article/list. SMSpivey (talk) 22:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I've removed all the incorrect disambigs and added many Indonesian rock bands who already have Wikipedia articles. I left in a redlink for a band that has a fairly detailed article on Indonesian wikipedia. SMSpivey (talk) 22:20, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: Unverifiable, impossible to maintain, unreferenced, and a category should be used instead because a category does more at the moment and is easier to maintain. Tavix (talk) 23:07, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess I'm a little confused about how this is unverifiable and unmaintainable. If the list is populated only by bands who are notable enough to have their own articles, it can be easily maintained and verified. There aren't an infinite amount of Indonesian rock bands in the world, much less on Wikipedia. Sure, there should be a category, but a category doesn't have the ability to hold other information about the subject. Also, the community consensus is that categories and lists are not mutually exclusive. I suppose I just disagree with you. SMSpivey (talk) 23:28, 29 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The problem is there aren't any other information to put there. And also, yes there are an infinite number, just where do you draw the line at what to include. At least with categories, only those with articles get it. Tavix (talk) 01:29, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

There are an infinite number of rock bands in Indonesia??? I didn't realize that part of the world was that overpopulated! DHowell (talk) 23:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, it was a little bit of an exaggeration. What it means is there are a ton of bands, but it is impossible to figure out which bands to include to make it a reasonable and manageable list. Tavix (talk) 04:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Funny, I had no problem using reliable sources to find notable bands to put in this list. I'm sure I've missed a few, being completely unfamiliar with the Indonesian music scene, but from what I could tell there weren't so many notable Indonesian rock bands to make this list unmanageable. DHowell (talk) 05:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Listcruft (If you feel the need to nominate List of British punk bands please do so). 5 of the 13 bands listed here would be prime candidates for AfD's - no significant 3rd party notability. Tavix's suggestion is practical. JamesBurns (talk) 00:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I hit the British punk band article up for prod. I'll see how it goes, and I'll let you know if it needs to be AfD'd. Tavix (talk) 01:32, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: someone removed the prod but no matter. JamesBurns (talk) 03:33, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please, as per WP:ITSCRUFT (applies to AfDs) and WP:NOCRUFT (in general) please don't call other editors contributions cruft. Ikip (talk) 12:40, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Can I remind you two of WP:PRESERVE policy "Preserve information. Whatever you do, endeavour to preserve information. Instead of removing, try to..." Wikipedia:Notability: "If an article fails to cite sufficient sources to demonstrate the notability of its subject, look for sources yourself." WP:INTROTODELETE & WP:POTENTIAL "Remember that deletion is a last resort." It is quite easy to criticize other editors contributions, it is much harder to find sources yourself and work to improve the article. Ikip (talk) 12:43, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Also the PROD of List of British punk bands is WP:POINTy. Ikip (talk) 12:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Comment - personal explanation by nominator. As found - when I checked it it was a 2 year old orphan, and had no connection with the category of similar title. Now in a quandary - I have no problem about either delete or no delete - as the arguments for the category and not the list have been seen many times before in various contexts, and I can see the serious benefits in that as placed by Tavix. By the nature of the Indonesian project - many eds with limited english add their favourite band as a red link and - never return to either make an article or add a ref. So for the moment I will stay with delete on the argument for category - unless convinced otherwise

Also http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Categories,_lists,_and_navigation_templates&action=watch - has discussion of policy in this matter Satu Suro 04:04, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Let me see if I understand what is going on here. This, along with the British punk article I gave as an explanation, are WP:Listcruft because they are lists of organizations by nationality (and therefore are unmaintainable)? Apart from my feelings on the fact that these are not listcruft, it is very unwise to piecemeal delete certain types of lists only with the consensus of three or four people. You are fundamentally rewriting consensus on list notabilty, against the general consensus of the rest of Wikipedia, via this AfD. If you think that lists of organizations by nationality are listcruft, you should round all of them up and put the up at AfD as a group, explaining your reasoning. Or bring it up as a policy debate on AfD discussions. By PROD-ding them, you are saying that it is uncontroversial that you are deleting them. Removing some of them, but not all will result in uneven application of an interpretation of Wikipedia policy. SMSpivey (talk) 05:21, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Unverifiable from a reliable source in toto - and therefore risking bias against entities which can be included but are not. The long-term orphaned status would suggest that it is indeed cruft. A category is sufficient. Orderinchaos 07:03, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong keep. The idea that this is unverifiable is easily disproved. I agree that before SMSpivey's improvements, most of the links were useless (at that time only Slank appeared to be a proper link to a rock band). But this Google News Archive search turns up 24 articles, from which I can find the bands Slank, Sheila On 7, Dewa and Padi. Expanding my search I can find non-English articles on Boomerang (this article lists other bands), and Jakarta SCTV Music Awards, which lists bands such as Gigi and Naif. DHowell (talk) 23:01, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, we know the bands exist, but that doesn't do anything to meet the other concerns listed in the AfD. Tavix (talk) 04:09, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The bands don't just "exist", they are clearly notable if you'd bother to look for and look at the sources. I've just added references to this list for several bands that don't have articles but have sources which indicate notability. I've also removed your {{prod}} from Koes Plus (many sources describe this 1970s band as "legendary"), and I've created a new, well-sourced, stub article about the band Radja to replace the former redirect of that title to Raja. This is how this list can be used to improve Wikipedia. DHowell (talk) 05:08, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It seems like it would be more appropriate to have a category Category:Indonesian rock bands, especially if this list grows. But I don't see a problem with having this list, if it gets cleaned up. Politizer ^talk/_contribs 06:11, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I've now added information on rock music in Indonesian culture to the article. There is a ton out there, but it would be a tad easier to put together if I spoke the language. Also, we have some cute little "experimenters" peeking around the page, so check the page history to make sure it hasn't been vandalized or accidentally had content removed before you make a judgement on it. SMSpivey (talk) 06:28, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Keep per SMSpivey and DHowell. Article has been cleaned up significantly. There are several lists like this on wikipedia.[1] Ikip (talk) 12:38, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
note to closing administrator The article has been cleaned up significantly since this article was put up for AfD. It now has 18 well referenced footnotes. Ikip (talk) 12:38, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - strong keep due to cleanup? - it is now more of a mess than when i first tagged it. referencing red links? - one of the major problems with the Indonesia project is the creation of red links in Indonesian lists, and articles - which are never followed up - to reference red links is reducing the credibility of the Indonesia project further Satu Suro 12:58, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn - reason being was that of the two sets of info in the Indonesian project when I nominated did not coincide in any way - the purpose for the afd was so that the category could be developed and the list removed.

The subsequent response has not helped the situation really - but to continue with the Afd seems pointless in the face of the various responses. I remain unconvinced that the list is providing accurate or balanced information - however if sufficient diligence in watching for WP:RS free red links is remedied - perhaps there will be no need to revisit this mess of a list in the mid term. Satu Suro 14:49, 31 January 2009 (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.