Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of number-one hits (Japan)

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. NW (Talk) 21:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of number-one hits (Japan)

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

This article is essentially a list of lists, and appears to be completely unnecessary. It appears that there are already several list articles organized by year, for instance List of number-one singles of 2009 (Japan) and List of number-one singles of 2008 (Japan). There doesn't need to be a list article that simply lists these articles. Perhaps a template that appears on each year page would be more appropriate. SnottyWong talk 01:28, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Meta-lists (and probably a good number of lists themselves) are better served with categories. /Blaxthos ( t / c ) 01:51, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. —J04n(talk page) 02:59, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Tim Song (talk) 00:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: It will be a lot shorter than a category. Polarpanda (talk) 11:39, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- What will be? (addendum: oh, a template! Yes, I agree with that; however, see my comment below.)--Jubilee♫clipman 01:27, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - confusing title: I thought it refered to Japan (band). There are only two blue links anyway: can't these articles be merged into a relevent article on the pop music of Japan for now? Then delete the redundant list of lists, obviously! --Jubilee♫clipman 01:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - per nom. --Klein zach 04:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - seems like an unnecessary list of lists. Cocytus [»talk«] 18:03, 14 December 2009 (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.