Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Extended History of Modern Rock Tracks

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. Generally redundant and duplicative. Black Kite 08:58, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Extended History of Modern Rock Tracks

A list created as an "extension" of Modern Rock Tracks, which already has a small section on statistics. Doesn't seem to be notable at all; even to merge it into the main article doesn't make sense. Definitely fails WP:NOT#IINFO. - eo (talk) 17:51, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What is the harm in giving more information, if you dont like page dont go to it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slivercobain (talk • contribs) 18:00, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:NOT. It's not that the nominator doesn't like the page; it's that it violates WP:NOT#IINFO and WP:NOT#STATS as it's an indiscriminate collection of trivia and stats about the charts. And please sign your posts. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 18:01, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Indiscriminate collection of information; why does it have to be more than ten weeks? Totally arbitrary collection of info. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells•Otter chirps)} 18:02, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What amount of weeks do you suggest? 5 weeks? There have been dozens of artists and even songs that have spent that amount of time and if thats what you are looking for you might as well just look at the List of US Number 1 Modern Rock Hits page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slivercobain (talk • contribs) 18:07, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Alot of this is a duplicate in Modern Rock Tracks, and there's no reason for it not to stay there. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 21:17, 26 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 15:16, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Keep As i forgot to mention in prior statements here, i am the author of this article. I feel that with further research on the chart this could be a very popular page for followers of the Modern Rock Tracks chart. People want to know what band's were successful. Alternative rock has been the dominant rock format since the early 1990s, needless to say it is an extremely popular form of music and the Modern Rock Tracks chart is essentially its main chart. Long time lovers of the genre im sure would love to see find out about how there favorite band broke records on this chart. And a lot of the records for the chart are not recognized on the main page. If this page is deleted their needs to be a second page for additional info to be shared.

There does NOT need to be a second page. All of this can go into the Modern Rock Tracks page. Pages on Wikipedia have no size limit. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 13:46, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I wouldn't consider any of it notable for the main article, even. It's all redundant information that can be found on the individual "by-year" number-ones pages. The statistics section that is already in the main article already highlights the important records. - eo (talk) 13:50, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are already two articles that already say all of this more or less, along with A template which leads to the individual lists of #1s on the chart per year. And like it's been pointed out, most of this is a duplicate of stats in the Modern Rock Tracks article. I think the page's creator thought that Wikipedia articles had a size limit. Doc Strange^MailboxLogbook 18:56, 29 May 2008 (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.