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 no consensus. Cirt (talk) 08:42, 24 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

List of music featured on Doctor Who[edit]

List of music featured on Doctor Who (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information; this article contains a lot of original research.

(PROD tag removed) ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 07:41, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - per extensive precedent, lists of songs used within TV series are non-encyclopedic trivia. Being used in a TV series has no effect on the notability of a particular song and the songs on this list have nothing in common past having been used in a particular TV show. Otto4711 (talk) 10:03, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Trivial importance Arma virumque cano (talk) 16:47, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This user's primarily contributions to Wikipedia have been to !vote (primarily delete) on dozens of AfDs approximately 1 minute apart from each other. See AN thread --ThaddeusB (talk) 19:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep, seems entirely relevant and a valid break-out from the featured article Doctor Who. Stifle (talk) 12:48, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: seems to fit with the rest of the Doctor Who content and is a list of sufficient notability and content to be worth having.--Elen of the Roads (talk) 23:29, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Per Otto. Hipocrite (talk) 04:54, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - non notable, not relevant. it's a shame that it even got here. After a whole week with the prod on it, all it takes is one person (after the prod had actually expired) to save it. 129.215.149.97 (talk) 10:13, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Stifle. This is content that would be perfectly valid in Doctor Who and has only been moved because the article is too long anyway. There might be music on the list that can be removed but music that was composed for those episodes or was later made famous because of being featured in DW is perfectly valid to have there. SoWhy 11:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep If the main article is too long, as others have said, you have to break it out into a side article. The information is perfectly valid on its own. Dream Focus 15:33, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  General comment > nobody seems to have twigged that the extremely long article contains only two references (it therefore contains an awful lot of unverified claims, and reading through it, a fair amount of original research), and the Notes column is just full of commentary such as, "Classical music," (who's to say what is and isn't classical?), "The Charleston was a popular dance craze in the 1920s. Black Orchid is set in 1925," (who's to rule on what counts as popular?) and so on. I don't think that it would be valid in the main article, as it's just an indiscriminate dump of information - and I use the word 'information' in its broadest possible sense, since most of the article is uncited [1] [2] ╟─TreasuryTag►contribs─╢ 15:39, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - as per Otto's impressively convincing list of other "List of songs from X" AfDs which clearly shows consensus that these articles are not notable. I try to find sources online to justify articles but here I just can't find anything. This information needs to be included with the relevant episode or series, they're just not notable enough on their own. Note to closer - if deleted, please kindly ensure this information is userfied, it will be required to reinsert it into other articles. Also, is there a Whopedia or similar to move it to as well? Bigger digger (talk) 22:34, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is the TARDIS Index File wikia for example. Regards SoWhy 22:43, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Indeed - I have an account there and can move this over to save the information for those who are interested.Etron81 (talk) 17:34, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per SoWhy. I see no reason why this isn't a valid topic for an article. The lack of sources is an issue but surely this can't be hard to fix considering the huge amount of literature that exists about virtually every detail of this show. Vyvyan Basterd (talk) 15:23, 23 May 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.