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. ✗plicit 14:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of articles about Taylor Swift[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Sorry Fram but I'm stealing your reasoning. Recently, a number of similar articles have been created, and I'm unclear whether they are a good idea. We already have categories for these, they are not a notable topic as a group, they are not a set index (as described at Wikipedia:Set index articles), and we could have a nearly endless supply of such lists. Not to mention these are all already linked on their main articles.

Per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of articles about Cameron Diaz PRAXIDICAE💕 15:41, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. While these are slightly better than the Cameron Diaz one, it makes little sense to e.g. create such a list for Kylie Minogue, and then add it as "related articles" to an already existing, better template with all these articles[1]. The same has been done for e.g. Pretty Little Liars[2]. In general, if there aren't too many articles, the main artcle + category + search bar are sufficient: if there are more articles, usually a navigational template already exists. Fram (talk) 15:55, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all Articles in these are included in the main articles' infoboxes, their bodies, and navigation templates. There is no need for separate articles to compile such links. Reywas92^Talk 16:49, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all for the reasons stated by Fram above. Ari T. Benchaim (talk) 16:51, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Actors and filmmakers, Bands and musicians, Women, and Lists. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 17:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all Pointless and redundant to categories and navboxes that do the same thing better. Geraldo Perez (talk) 18:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all, clearly a poor-man's attempt at a portal and portals are a contentious idea as it is. Navigational templates and categories already do the trick, as do established subpage formats such as "X discography", "X videography", and "List of songs written by X". Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 18:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all, for the reasons already given. Athel cb (talk) 19:07, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all. There is a reason we have categories and navbox templates is so we don't need unnecessary list articles like this. Ajf773 (talk) 21:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all per reasoning provided the discussion above. Not much different than this "Listography" AfD a couple years back. Starcheerspeaksnewslostwars^{Talk to me} 22:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete. There are a number of other List of articles about pages that have been created prior to these ones, for example List of articles about Australia and New Zealand jointly. So, I don't understand why these are not worthy of creation, as in Michael Jackson, Madonna and Kylie Minogue's example, as these people have several articles related to them, and in my experience category pages (like Category:Michael Jackson, Category:Madonna and Category:Kylie Minogue) have often been messy and filled with other articles that don't directly link to the person themselves. Basically, I think of these ones I've created for Michael Jackson, Madonna and Kylie Minogue as neat versions of their respective Category articles. Samuelloveslennonstella (talk) 22:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's a much broader subject matter and highly relevant. Every individual, particularly in entertainment does not need a list like this as it's all linked in the template already. This is nothing short of disruption. PRAXIDICAE💕 22:41, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all, as others mentioned, navboxes and categories serve this role perfectly fine. Hey man im josh (talk) 22:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
delete all after a quick check that the articles and/or navboxes include all/important links from the lists — GhostInTheMachine ^{talk to me} 10:28, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all These can either be linked by categories, or in some cases by on the main article creating links to other relevant articles. There is no need for this "lists of articles about x" type of page.John Pack Lambert (talk) 12:56, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all - The articles were all created recently by Samuelloveslennonstella, who perhaps saw a gap in Wikipedia's organization of articles. Kudos for your interest in helping out, but all of these new list articles are a solution to a problem that does not exist, and they just add clutter. As noted by everyone above, Wikipedia is already equipped with various types of categories, templates, and navigation boxes that serve this purpose. If you think those are deficient in some fashion, start discussions in the proper places to suggest improvements. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 14:45, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Reason we have a rash of index type articles in the past few years.....is that 60+% (mobile users) don't see nav templates or categories..... thus most don't see any navigational aid. Wish this could be fixed and reasons for deletion actually bsesd on user reality. Moxy- 02:31, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. Redundant with the categories and the templates. No added value beyond. No objection to redirects to the templates, would someone be so inclined. gidonb (talk) 20:05, 1 May 2022 (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.