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. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:42, 26 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

VH1 Greatest Hard Rock Songs

[edit]

Non-notable list prepared by a network. Never mind that I haven't heard any of these songs, I fail to see how a list without any particular scale of inclusion would warrant an article, especially given the utter lack of sources. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Many otters • One hammer • HELP)} 17:29, 12 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. Wholly subjective list from single source. Definitely not encyclopaedic. Eddie.willers (talk) 01:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and re-write- That VH1 did a list of its 100 greatest rock songs should probably be covered, although in its current form, the page is not very good, given that its just the list and some OR regarding the list. I'm sure more information is out there, regarding thing ssuch as when the series aired, who the commentaters were, and who was polled in the survey that was conducted to compile the list (that said, I don't have access to the resources right now to verify this, so if anyone could back me up, I'd be greatful). PS: Songs 85, 19 and 5 are awesome live (not that that matters a whit regarding whether or not this should be kept or not). Umbralcorax (talk) 17:54, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete - it may be interesting but it isn't notable. Where is the coverage about this list in reliable sources? -- Whpq (talk) 19:03, 13 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A quick Google seach shows that this was independently covered, including by Entertainment Weekly [1]. Rlendog (talk) 21:28, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Keep - List is notable and received independent coverage from independent sources. Rlendog (talk) 21:28, 17 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MacMed^{talk to me!}_{what have i done?} 22:22, 19 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete Possibly a copyvio, definetly not notable as a list. Hipocrite (talk) 04:45, 20 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as above - listcruft. Eusebeus (talk) 15:54, 21 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A television show got third party media review. The suggested guidelines for notability, say that is enough. Dream Focus 17:54, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You know what? There are loads of similar shows produced every year. Here's a sample from just one channel:[2]

The 100 Greatest TV Adverts
The 100 Greatest Sex Symbols
The 100 Greatest Tearjerkers
The 100 Greatest War Films
The 100 Greatest Stand-Ups
The 100 Greatest Albums
The 100 Greatest Musicals
The 100 Greatest TV Character
The 100 Greatest Movie Stars
The 100 Greatest Family Films

The only reason that these programmes ever get made is because they are cheap. Hire a few talking heads, play a load of clips (cheap to buy the rights for these) Bingo! you've got 3 hours of telly, off to the pub, trebles all round.

The audience is rarely told who votes for these things, (because it depends solely on what some low-paid production assistant has cobbled together and is by no means an objective list) or what the criteria for inclusion (sorry DF, but it does mean something) are. Does Wikipedia need an article on any or all of them? I think not. pablo_hablo. 20:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as totally subjective and only being based on internet votes (which can be tricked easily). --Avant-garde a clue-hexaChord ² 18:45, 23 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Lists like this can be notable, for example all the lists the American Film Institute puts out are commented on by the media, but this one doesn't appear to make the cut. Nothing from a quick Google search and Google News search evidences notability, and I doubt this would make it into library stacks either. Them From Space 14:32, 25 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.