Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of classic rock songs (2nd nomination)

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. While I acknowledge the vast difference in participation between this AfD and the previous one, I think we can call this consensus to delete. I'm sympathetic to the arguments now (and previously) that this is a well-defined genre, but I'm more convinced by the below participants that it is well-defined only by each listener (or, more likely, by their local broadcaster or DJ). In particular are the arguments about the subjectivity of such a list, especially given that two sources have largely determined this list (fantastic though Walt Hickey may be).

On a process note, I'm not actually deleting this, per se: it existed as a redirect to Classic rock for a decade before the first AfD, so I'm restoring it as such. Let me know if anyone is opposed to that, and I'll put it up at WP:RfD. ~ Amory (u • t • c) 21:36, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of classic rock songs

[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)

Fails WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE. A song to be categorised as classic rock is extremely subjective, the only sources that verify this is songs mention in "best of" lists. Artists being categorised as classic rock is a far more notable attibute than songs which could include the artists entire back catalogue. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajf773 (talk • contribs)

Delete. This list is hardly inclusive of the genre (even of songs which could be sourced as "classic rock" songs). A list that was "complete", even restricted to those songs that receive radio play would cover thousands of songs. I would have no objection to more narrowly defining the coverage of the article and moving it to a title reflecting narrowed coverage. bd2412 T 21:19, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 21:26, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 21:26, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep Classic rock is well established as a genre now, like classical music. The nomination's argument is no better than the previous attempt to delete this notable category, which easily passes WP:LISTN. There's even a huge hardcover Encyclopedia of Classic Rock now. Andrew D. (talk) 22:45, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- We have no List of classical music compositions. bd2412 T 01:15, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  - We have numerous classical music lists. My favourite is the list of classical music with an unruly audience response! Andrew D. (talk) 17:27, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yes, other articles exist. No doubt we also have an article on someone's reeeeeeally dreamy gym teacher. If you start one on your French teacher, you can point to it in the AfD. OTOH, the gym teacher might be a retired Olympian and that article's existence has nothing to do with your French teacher's notability. On the other other hand, maybe the article on the gym teacher should be deleted as well. - SummerPhD^v2.0 18:59, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This AfD isn't about the classic rock genre. It's about an indiscriminate list of songs. Ajf773 (talk) 04:12, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete The original article was the product of one misguided editor and it was correctly changed to a redirect where it remained for 10 years. Since it was restored it has been a magnet for unsourced POV entries that requires, but has not received, constant monitoring. The scope of this list is so vague that it could conceivably contain every rock song from an undefined era spanning the late 1960s to the late 1980s, or just the 200 songs that have been regularly played on classic rock radio stations for decades. Piriczki (talk) 23:19, 27 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Four sources≠good article. Completely subjective criteria; at this point I'm hearing Nirvana and RHCP regularly on WKLH, one of the most well-known classic rock stations in the US, for instance, and one station could embrace "Brown Eyed Girl" while another could have a DJ rant against Van Morrison's very existence for ten minutes. The genre is constantly evolving, and this article can't hope to contain it. Nate • (chatter) 00:00, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Looks like a random tracklist for a triple CD release, rather than a definitive list. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 07:33, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Indiscriminate. Dozens of "classic rock" radio stations play their "top 500" songs every Memorial Day/Labor Day/July 4th/whatever weekend. Clearly, there are thousands of "classic rock" songs and any attempt to list them would be a useless catalog. We could create similarly useless/ indiscriminate lists of CHR, AOR, A/C, light jazz, quet storm, urban contemporary, etc. songs of similar length. - SummerPhD^v2.0 17:03, 28 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Keep because it is a reasonable list of notable songs of a defined genre, with at least three in-depth significant and reliable sources, while being incomplete does not require deletion (*ordinary editing can fix that). Bearian (talk) 15:52, 2 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - Absolutely subjective and uncompletable list. Carrite (talk) 04:45, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as with previous discussions like Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of country songs (2nd nomination), extremely subjective, probably more so than the one linked as classic rock is not a genre per se unlike say, country or pop. - CHAMPION ^{(talk) (contributions) (logs)} 11:08, 3 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Subjective/taste-based untenable list -- DexterPointy (talk) 17:07, 3 August 2018 (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.