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.
WP:LISTCRUFT; as it is impossible to determine all the bands from St. Louis and this is better served as a category. Tavix | Talk 18:15, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. There's no reason why a list and a category cannot co-exist. A category cannot contain redlinks. I don't see a good reason to delete this.--Michig (talk) 20:02, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Bands with red-links generally aren't notable. Why have non-notable bands on the list? Tavix | Talk 21:12, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
A red link indicates the absence of an article, not necessarily a lack of notability. Since there are thousands of notable bands and musicians that do not yet have articles in this encyclopedia, lists containing redlinks to articles that are yet to be written are perfectly valid. Categories, on the other hand, can only contain links to articles that exist, so serve a different purpose.--Michig (talk) 21:32, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is the classic indiscriminate, unsourced list. It's taken for granted that every band in America wants to make its own Wikipedia its webhost, and band articles get nominated all the time. And because it's nothing more than a bulletin board for posting the name of one's own musically-inclined group of people, it doesn't provide any information other than that some blue links, and a lot of redlinked "click here to create an article about your band" invitations. Mandsford (talk) 20:33, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's hardly indiscriminate as it's about a very specific set of articles. There are undoubtedly a lot of bands listed who are not sufficiently notable, but that can easily be remedied by removing them. A short summary can also be added for each entry to give some context.--Michig (talk) 21:40, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. An AFD notice had not been placed in the article by the nominator. I have now added it.--Michig (talk) 21:36, 22 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete A classic of indescriminatude. Mangoe (talk) 22:50, 24 November 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.