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 all. (non-admin closure) HurricaneFan 25 15:39, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of female rock singers[edit]

AfDs for this article:

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

Completely unsourced. Says nothing about the relevance of females in the genre. Fails WP:SALAT as I can find no sources explicitly about the relevance of women in the various genres. First AFD closed in 2007 with a shaky WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS rationale from an extremely rabid inclusionist. Most of the lists are also prone to rampant edit-warring, self promotion and inclusion of non-notable, redlinked acts without a foreseen way to stop. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 17:58, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:12, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 18:13, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

comment - Are you sure you want to put all these together in 1 AfD? A search of WP shows that there is consensus for "list of female <whatevers>" in general. edit-warring, self promotion, inclusion of non-notable & redlinked are not reason for deletion. Exit2DOS ^{• Ctrl • Alt • Del} 18:14, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Per Exit2DOS2000, I don't see how these can be discussed all in one go. Also, very few lists are sourced independently of the articles. For what it's worth, I would say Keep for List of female rock singers given that nearly all of them have articles, the list is a good length, and the theme (female and rock) doesn't strike me as a trivial intersection. I haven't studied the others in the nomination. --Northernhenge (talk) 18:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- I meant that lists in general are often unsourced. --Northernhenge (talk) 21:41, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Needs splitting. Definitely keep List of female rock singers - there are loads of books specifically about women in rock. Some of the others also look perfectly reasonable. Not so sure why female Australian composers should be separated from other Australian composers, though, but it looks like a merge at worst. Lack of sources is a poor rationale for deletion - many of these would be easy to source.--Michig (talk) 20:00, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep As per above "list of female <whatevers>" is common. Some of the lists do need cleaned up but then so do many of our articles. Deleting to fix problems doesn't seem like the best solution. --Tbennert (talk) 03:01, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A notable list on a notable subject. The rationale of "Most of the lists are also prone to rampant edit-warring, self promotion and inclusion of non-notable, redlinked acts without a foreseen way to stop" is quite frankly a piss-poor reason to justify deletion of anything. Lugnuts (talk) 08:02, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep ALL – These are functional and useful lists to navigate biography and band articles. Contrary to the statement in the nomination, "Completely unsourced", the articles List of classic female blues singers and List of female composers by birth year do have sources in them. Also, topic notability is based upon the availability of sources, not whether or not they are present in articles. Northamerica1000^(talk) 11:19, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All per arguments of User:Northamerica1000 and User:Lugnuts, these are extreemly encyclopedic lists that many people would find interesting. – Phoenix B 1of3 (talk) 18:26, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all Bad nomination, nominator listing irrelevant reasons for deletion. If something needs more sources, then tag it as such. Follow WP:BEFORE and try to find some yourself before wasting everyone's time at an AFD. List of female rock singers is nothing but blue links! You don't need references of course unless someone out there sincerely doubts the information. Click on their link, their article stating they are rock singers, and refers to them as female. Dream Focus 19:04, 8 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per the above; I'm not convinced that these lists are unencyclopedic, and - as noted - most of them are filled with blue links. You might have more luck with a separate nomination for each list and a more cogent argument as to why the list should be deleted. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 21:53, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Snow Keep. Per all the above keeps ... not a snowball's chance of deletion here. And yes ; AfD is not for cleanup, as a number of editors have already commented, and "prone to edit warring" is not a rationale for deletion either.--Epeefleche (talk) 09:12, 12 November 2011 (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.