Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of prolific singers

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. Michig (talk) 16:32, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

List of prolific singers

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

This was mentioned by MT Train at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of prolific songwriters. I see that this list has the same issues (WP:GEOBIAS to India, arbitrary inclusion criterion of >100 songs, lack of sources) and was created by the same author, মাখামাখি (talk · contribs). LaundryPizza03 (talk) 11:31, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 12:24, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 12:25, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 12:27, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. ^{Babymissfortune} 12:27, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete: Another arbitrary and biased article. MT Train^Discuss 12:54, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Arbitrary inclusion criteria. Recording 100 songs isn't an unusual achievement. An average CD has about 12 tracks, so anyone who's recorded more than around 8 CDs or LPs would qualify. Also, the 'Top 15' section appears to be WP:OR. Pburka (talk) 17:32, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- (In an extreme example, Anal Cunt released a single EP in 1990 with 5643 (very short) songs. They appear to be missing from the Top 15.) Pburka (talk) 00:14, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. WP:NOTINDISCRIMINATE and for same reasoning as Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of prolific songwriters. The title including the word prolific is a dead giveaway. Ajf773 (talk) 17:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per all the above and the other AfD. Lugnuts ^{Fire Walk with Me} 19:05, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete This is worse than the list of prolific song-writers. This is a nightmare waiting to happen on all fronts.John Pack Lambert (talk) 04:48, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comment After review, I have realized that this is a worse list than I initially thought. To begin with, for example Alex Boye, do we count the songs he sang with a British boy band, and with the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, or do we just count productions he did as a solo vocalist. Is this recording of 100 different songs, or is it 100 recordings, so if one singer recorded the same song a lot of times, they can get to the list. Recording should include the act of making a song for a film, and each song for the film should be counted seperately. This makes me suspect that people like Nelson Eddy go here. However it also makes me ponder the implications of so many early films being lost. I also dislike the fact that this seems to suggest that only post-1900 singers can have been prolific, and that opera singers from before that are not in any way prolific.John Pack Lambert (talk) 05:12, 15 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I could not say it much better than JPL above: it's a nightmare on all fronts. Most of these number of recordings are unsourced, dogs know where they were copy-pasted from, and they will either remain unsourced or be a constant cause for debate as sources for good reasons often don't match on the exact number of recordings by an article. WP:INDISCRIMINATE list, the effort may have been in totally good faith, but delete per WP:DEL14. Sam Sailor 10:48, 15 January 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.