674:(for example) has an article, all lists of winners should have articles, but that is not how Knowledge (XXG) works. Knowledge (XXG) has articles only for topics which are “notable,” where notable topics are defined as those that have received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. So in the case of this year’s Oscars, notice that
652:
The lists in these articles constitute a valuable encyclopaedic resource about music preferences, becoming more valuable as time passes and the change or stability in those preferences is revealed. The popularity of the pieces is demonstrated as being far more enduring than any "pop" pieces. The
411:
arguments won't work. The original top 100 did get some press coverage, but even then most of the keep arguments in that AfD were dubious or non-policy-based: "so marginal that they hardly seem worth the debate", "no less notable than The Rocky and
Bullwinkle Show" (untrue: see the amount of
242:
The AfD nomination there (as here) cites non-notability but the discussion (both for and against) lacks understanding of the
Knowledge (XXG) concept of notability, arguing that the ABC list is not important or is interesting to readers. But Knowledge (XXG) defines notability not in terms of
195:
Inherently unencyclopedic list. Promotional. Fails GNG. Speedy declined on the grounds that it is part of event series where every other one has a page, but even if hypothetically the other lists (or the series as a whole) are notable, notability is not transitive: this list is not notable.
282:
276:
164:
559:. But in many of the discussions, there was little or no attempt to reference Knowledge (XXG) policy: people just said "Keep because it's always been kept". That's not a valid reason to keep a topic which fails
507:, 8 in total - the deletion debate gets closed as "Keep". A good summary of all the prevoius arguments used, and re-hashed each time, can be derived from them! See the overarching article's deletion debate here
536:
508:
317:
This AfD raises an issue not in that nomination: This article is unencyclopedic because rather than being a collection of information about the ABC list, it is essentially a copy of the ABC list. —
532:
524:
216:
528:
564:
520:
297:
516:
512:
264:
357:
Perhaps the word “promotional” is unfortunate: I don’t mean to say the
Knowledge (XXG) article is promotional but rather that the ABC list it is copied from is intended to raise ratings.
158:
258:
571:
were astonishingly poor, with nobody at all advancing anything that resembled actual policy-based reasons. If you can find a policy-based reason to keep this article, say so.
461:
Good question: I say it is “inherently unencyclopedic” because rather than being a collection of information about the ABC list, it is essentially a copy of the ABC list. See
254:
117:
304:
629:
609:
589:
311:
The last post at that AfD cites relevant sources, but they apply to that list not this. Perhaps someday this list will have sources to make it notable, but it is
239:
That AfD is of little relevance here. A majority of the discussion there was on copyright, which is not at issue here (assuming the ABC free licenses their list).
403:
As not notable. No evidence of significant coverage in third-party sources. There's also no evidence of notability for some other entries in the series, e.g.
270:
124:
90:
85:
94:
678:
has a long list of sources, most of them independent of the
Academy. Notice also that the list of nominees and winners is a minority of the article. —
442:
77:
386:– There have been lengthy discussions about other events in this series, resulting in "Keep". There's no need or reason to do that again. --
404:
179:
146:
17:
339:
I agree notability is not inherited, but in what way is this promotional? Also, for all the same reasons in the AfD quoted above.
568:
140:
429:
This is the 2015 edition of an annual, long-running, and well known public music poll. Granted, it's not as famous as the
555:
If you read the AfDs, you'll see that the early polls were kept because they received independent media coverage and met
408:
685:
472:
371:
324:
203:
136:
81:
707:
688:
662:
641:
621:
601:
580:
546:
495:
475:
452:
421:
395:
374:
348:
327:
230:
206:
59:
40:
441:
unencyclopedic list" (my emphasis) as the nominator says, given how many other equivalent competitions are covered in
563:, and because a bad decision was made in the past we don't have to keep making bad decisions. The keep decisions in
391:
186:
653:
music choices themselves, and their composers, are all notable and linked to well-developed important articles.
658:
576:
417:
73:
65:
437:
are based) because classical music isn't as popular as pop music. But I don't see how you can call it an "
462:
152:
703:
387:
36:
364:
know what significant coverage in independent reliable sources is: I invite you to change your !vote. —
430:
344:
312:
675:
671:
654:
543:
449:
290:
172:
572:
493:
413:
225:
56:
637:
617:
597:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
702:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
682:
469:
368:
321:
200:
560:
556:
244:
340:
540:
446:
245:
significant coverage in secondary reliable sources that are independent of the subject
488:
221:
53:
633:
613:
593:
111:
679:
466:
365:
318:
197:
537:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Classic 100 Ten Years On (ABC)
509:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Classic 100 Countdowns (ABC)
503:
For what it's worth, this debate happens every single year - and
696:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
533:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Classic 100 Symphony (ABC)
525:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Classic 100 concerto (ABC)
529:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Classic 100 chamber (ABC)
565:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles_for_deletion/Classic_100_Mozart_(ABC)
521:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Classic 100 Mozart (ABC)
511:, and the annual competition articles' deletion debates here:
517:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Classic 100 opera (ABC)
513:
Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion/Classic 100 piano (ABC)
107:
103:
99:
289:
171:
465:
for analogous examples of unencyclopedic content. —
303:
185:
360:I don’t know about other keep-!voters, but surely
43:). No further edits should be made to this page.
710:). No further edits should be made to this page.
670:: Perhaps some people think that because the
8:
628:Note: This debate has been included in the
608:Note: This debate has been included in the
588:Note: This debate has been included in the
630:list of Lists-related deletion discussions
627:
610:list of Radio-related deletion discussions
607:
590:list of Music-related deletion discussions
587:
443:Category:Music competitions in Australia
243:importance or interest but in terms of
217:previous discussion about these lists
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
405:Classic 100 Baroque and Before (ABC)
412:references on that article), etc.
24:
676:87th Academy Awards#References
569:Classic 100 Ten Years On (ABC)
433:competitions (after which the
1:
727:
689:20:19, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
60:22:46, 16 June 2015 (UTC)
699:Please do not modify it.
663:04:34, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
642:14:23, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
622:14:23, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
602:14:23, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
581:14:39, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
547:12:21, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
496:12:02, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
476:21:36, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
453:11:40, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
422:10:48, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
396:10:22, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
375:21:36, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
349:10:08, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
328:21:36, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
231:08:50, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
207:08:23, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
32:Please do not modify it.
74:Classic 100 Swoon (ABC)
66:Classic 100 Swoon (ABC)
487:, as per above. --
431:Triple J Hottest 100
672:87th Academy Awards
409:WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS
644:
624:
604:
505:every single time
718:
701:
491:
388:Michael Bednarek
308:
307:
293:
228:
190:
189:
175:
127:
115:
97:
34:
726:
725:
721:
720:
719:
717:
716:
715:
714:
708:deletion review
697:
489:
250:
226:
132:
123:
88:
72:
69:
48:The result was
41:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
724:
722:
713:
712:
692:
691:
665:
655:Whiteghost.ink
646:
645:
625:
605:
585:
584:
583:
550:
549:
498:
481:
480:
479:
478:
456:
455:
424:
398:
380:
379:
378:
377:
358:
352:
351:
333:
332:
331:
330:
315:
309:
248:
240:
234:
233:
193:
192:
129:
68:
63:
46:
45:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
723:
711:
709:
705:
700:
694:
693:
690:
687:
684:
681:
677:
673:
669:
666:
664:
660:
656:
651:
648:
647:
643:
639:
635:
631:
626:
623:
619:
615:
611:
606:
603:
599:
595:
591:
586:
582:
578:
574:
573:Colapeninsula
570:
566:
562:
558:
554:
553:
552:
551:
548:
545:
542:
538:
534:
530:
526:
522:
518:
514:
510:
506:
502:
499:
497:
494:
492:
486:
483:
482:
477:
474:
471:
468:
464:
460:
459:
458:
457:
454:
451:
448:
444:
440:
436:
432:
428:
425:
423:
419:
415:
414:Colapeninsula
410:
406:
402:
399:
397:
393:
389:
385:
382:
381:
376:
373:
370:
367:
363:
359:
356:
355:
354:
353:
350:
346:
342:
338:
335:
334:
329:
326:
323:
320:
316:
314:
310:
306:
302:
299:
296:
292:
288:
284:
281:
278:
275:
272:
269:
266:
263:
260:
256:
253:
252:Find sources:
249:
246:
241:
238:
237:
236:
235:
232:
229:
224:
223:
218:
214:
211:
210:
209:
208:
205:
202:
199:
188:
184:
181:
178:
174:
170:
166:
163:
160:
157:
154:
151:
148:
145:
142:
138:
135:
134:Find sources:
130:
126:
122:
119:
113:
109:
105:
101:
96:
92:
87:
83:
79:
75:
71:
70:
67:
64:
62:
61:
58:
55:
51:
44:
42:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
698:
695:
667:
649:
504:
500:
484:
463:WP:NOTMIRROR
438:
434:
426:
400:
383:
361:
336:
300:
294:
286:
279:
273:
267:
261:
251:
220:
212:
194:
182:
176:
168:
161:
155:
149:
143:
133:
120:
49:
47:
31:
28:
435:classic 100
277:free images
159:free images
490:Jack of Oz
439:Inherently
341:Joseph2302
313:WP:TOOSOON
704:talk page
634:• Gene93k
614:• Gene93k
594:• Gene93k
37:talk page
706:or in a
215:per the
118:View log
54:RoySmith
39:or in a
668:Comment
283:WPÂ refs
271:scholar
165:WPÂ refs
153:scholar
91:protect
86:history
680:teb728
561:WP:GNG
557:WP:GNG
467:teb728
401:Delete
366:teb728
319:teb728
255:Google
222:Graham
198:teb728
137:Google
95:delete
57:(talk)
52:. --
541:Witty
501:Note:
447:Witty
407:, so
298:JSTOR
259:books
180:JSTOR
141:books
125:Stats
112:views
104:watch
100:links
16:<
659:talk
650:Keep
638:talk
618:talk
598:talk
577:talk
567:and
544:lama
485:Keep
450:lama
445:. .
427:Keep
418:talk
392:talk
384:Keep
345:talk
337:Keep
291:FENS
265:news
213:Keep
173:FENS
147:news
108:logs
82:talk
78:edit
50:keep
362:you
305:TWL
187:TWL
116:– (
661:)
640:)
632:.
620:)
612:.
600:)
592:.
579:)
539:.
535:;
531:;
527:;
523:;
519:;
515:;
420:)
394:)
347:)
285:)
227:87
219:.
167:)
110:|
106:|
102:|
98:|
93:|
89:|
84:|
80:|
686:c
683:t
657:(
636:(
616:(
596:(
575:(
473:c
470:t
416:(
390:(
372:c
369:t
343:(
325:c
322:t
301:·
295:·
287:·
280:·
274:·
268:·
262:·
257:(
247:.
204:c
201:t
196:—
191:)
183:·
177:·
169:·
162:·
156:·
150:·
144:·
139:(
131:(
128:)
121:·
114:)
76:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.