Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Songs by Mohammed Rafi

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. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 21:10, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

List of Songs by Mohammed Rafi

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

Just a list and come within WP:NOTEVERYTHING. A good and comprhensive article on Mohammed Rafi already lists notable output - this is just a directory . Also possible copy vio from [1] Velella ^{Velella Talk} 23:50, 11 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this is pure and simple WP:LISTCRUFT and is admittedly incomplete. Eddie.willers (talk) 00:56, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly every article in Wikipedia is incomplete, so that can't be used as a reason to delete, and "listcruft" is nothing more than a term of abuse rather than a reasoned argument. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rejoinder - I admit that the word listcruft can be used pejoratively, but this article is simply that, a list of works with no demonstration as to why they collectively merit an article of their own. Why not mention the key works in the main Mohammed Rafi article? Furthermore, I dspute your assertion that, "Nearly every article in Wikipedia is incomplete" - by what definition? Eddie.willers (talk) 23:37, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. It seems to be standard practice for major popular music stars to have complete discographies on Wikipedia, and you don't get much more major than Mohammed Rafi. This bare alphabetical listing is pretty useless in itself, but could become an acceptable article if it was sorted by year and film, and even better with the addition of the composers of the songs. We don't delete articles that have potential for improvement. The Mohammed Rafi article only scratches the surface of his output. Phil Bridger (talk) 18:13, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:44, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep but merge a condensed list to Mohammed Rafi#List of Songs. --Uncle Ed (talk) 19:57, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep needs improvement not deletion. Shyamsunder (talk) 20:59, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge per Ed Poor. Jclemens (talk) 21:51, 12 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep [2]He is a very famous singer who is known worldwide. He has also sung many songs in different languages. I also agree that the article needs improvement rather than deletion. Torreslfchero (talk) 12:48, 13 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The logic cited for merge/ deletion apply to several other wikilist articles such as List of songs by Elvis Presley and others. The list can't be merged with originl article on Mohammed Rafi just because the sheer volume of work done by him.. I believe a separate list for his songs is justified. Improvements are welcome. ClintonSS (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 13:25, 13 February 2012 (UTC).[reply]
Super-Duper Keep : Read reasons above. No merger required as merged page will be oversize. -Animeshkulkarni (talk) 10:45, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. I hope those familiar with the subject matter (and List of Elvis Presley songs as well) appreciate, that, at the moment these two lists are about as encyclopedic as a list of dinners I have eaten over the last twelve months, The big difference is that these two list can be improved with reference to films, writers, year of recording, albums, recording studio, arranger, and a wealth of other information that will make each article interesting I only mention the Presley list because somebody else brought it up and it does suffer the same problems. Cheers. --Richhoncho (talk) 14:00, 15 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Per above keeps.--Epeefleche (talk) 07:04, 18 February 2012 (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.