Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of DJMax track listings

< Wikipedia:Articles for deletion
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. Whilst there are some arguments for merging, the concensus seems to be that this should be done as reliable sources are located. Marasmusine (talk) 17:40, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

List of DJMax track listings

edit
List of DJMax track listings (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
(Find video game sources: "List of DJMax track listings" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk)

Fails WP:GNG and somewhat redundant, as it's a list of lists.Bread Ninja (talk) 14:25, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of video game related deletion discussions. MrKIA11 (talk) 17:35, 18 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delete per same reasoning that we wouldn't list cars from racing games, monsters from shooters, etc. No notability (no significant coverage of the track appearance in these video games). There are some VG RS, like [1], but those are just bare lists for fans. I'm not sure if these should be kept/merged with the main articles; I'd leave that decision to individual article editors. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 07:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are only two active individual editors working with DJMAX articles and they are Mikitei (myself) and Bread Ninja. I've been hoping that we would get third editor with us to work with DJMAX articles so that these conflicts wouldn't have to happen all the time... (sigh)... There are sources for track lists, artists and composers and designers but mostly they are in Korean magazines and such. It takes time to do research and find sources for them. Time Bread Ninja doesn't want to give. Besides Bread Ninja doesn't work with these articles apart from doing bad copyediting. Please note that DJMAX tracks aren't just popular music with generic 3d graphics on a background like in Guitar Hero... Music (style being mostly experimental class) is composed only for these games and music videos for them are various forms of drawn visual art (which is also mostly experimental). It is notable article but also starter class type. It needs commentary and additions. --Mikitei (talk) 11:26, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • As a reflection on comments above and below, I am unfamiliar with editing history related to the article, what were the reasons for merging/splitting, or any editor disagreements. I don't know whether this is the right venue/bad faith nomination or otherwise. My !vote was based on the article as it is. The point being, is WP:Notability guideline of "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" satisfied? The article sources and search results suggest that it is not. (And I don't speak Korean to search local language sources.) So, as long as sources are not presented, my argument is "delete, because article fails WP:GNG." —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:00, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am satisfied with your answer. But I still hope people would start improving it. There are much more worthless articles in Wikipedia than this one. Also two editors improving this on occasional basis is not going to lead anywhere. --Mikitei (talk) 16:54, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Strong Keep - I strongly disagree cutting "Track lists" article into small shards of information. At beginning there was in every DJMAX articles a single list of the audiovisual tracks they had. Some had even the same unmaintained lists. Then some people merged it into a list of DJMAX Tracks lists. It was a clear improvement because now one page told information once and accurately rather than having 15 different copies of the same content. Non-updated lists where cleaned and everything started to look much better. But time went by and it was forgotten for two years. Then it was improved upon myself and others. Bread Ninja did some disruptive editing and I had to do a edit war with her to keep it together. After that Bread Ninja went silent for a few months. Now she came back here and started arguing about the same issues again and this time by wanting to merge everything back to articles. When I told her that I'll strongly disagree with her she obviously got angry and started this deletion request. I hope you guys can look for the personal issues involved and put this deletion on hold or at least make a good argument for it. I am not going to accept a result where Bread Ninja and her buddy agrees to delete it on a background in a silent deal. However I have no problems if there's a good majority supporting the deletion and they have at least some kind of arguments about why they think it should be deleted... I think that this is a bad move because it will not help these stub DJMAX articles to rise into a better class and would be lying to oneself about the quality of the DJMAX articles. Filling articles with long lists doesn't make them less stub than they are. What would make DJMAX articles less stub is that you, I and other editors write more actual content into those articles. Besides there's no need to have long lists on the article pages and that's the reason all the track lists where collected into a one single article which supports all of the DJMAX articles. If this page is now deleted, Bread Ninja will surely add all the track lists from that page into the articles. It will cause other people to merge them into a one single article and after that we will again be in this same situation. "Track lists" article has its meaning and purpose. All those lists are not needed in DJMAX articles because they are mostly supporting information (Just like the other lists in Wikipedia). Almost all other music games have a list article like this and I think that's enough of precedent to keep them together. If you start arguing this is not a significant list then what makes the other lists more significant than this one? For example why we have articles such as Complete list of downloadable songs for the Rock Band series, List of songs in Rock Band, List of songs in Rock Band 2, List of songs in Guitar Hero, List of songs in Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock, List of songs in Guitar Hero World Tour and it's perfectly fine that they exist if this list of DJMAX Tracks isn't allowed to exist? I demand that song lists of eg. Rock Band and Guitar Hero are also deleted if DJMAX track lists articles is voted to be deleted. It would be fair... --Mikitei (talk) 11:26, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I am unsure if "Bread Ninja and her buddy" is in reference to me, but, if so, I'll ask you to refrain from making any personal comments. I came her from Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games#List of DJMax track listings AfD, and my !vote is based on list's merits. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 12:00, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just a general talk about the matter. It's also a scenario I've faced once with another person... I apologise if you felt it was somehow a personal comment. I didn't mean it that way... I've been trying to improve DJMAX articles lately and Bread Ninja is doing more harm than good. It has lead to big tiring debates about even the simplest matters. I've done more than enough trying to cooperate with her on these matters. For example read DJMAX matters from my talk page or User Talk:Jinnai's talk page. Also it's worth reading the talk pages from DJMAX articles. Main thing here is that Bread Ninja came to ask me about considering the splitting the article. I considered few minutes and replied "No reason" and then I tried to prevent it becoming one of those big fights by writing "my decision is final". So she then started this deletion process as a answer to that. While I am OK if the article is deleted. I still don't want unreferenced material into articles just for the sake of filling them. Why do they even need the track lists? --Mikitei (talk) 17:18, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Personally, I have no idea why they would need to be included unless there is some significance; same way its kind of pointless to non-fans to list cars from racing games, monsters fr... etc. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 19:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I want to add that shouldn't this be debate about merging the article into other DJMAX articles rather than conversation about deleting it? Bread Ninja obviously wants to merge it and not delete it. I am pretty sure Bread Ninja didn't know about the proper merging policy ( Wikipedia:Merging ) and has made a mistake. I wouldn't be surprised about that. Also please take a look at the article in question before stating your opinion. Thank you! --Mikitei (talk) 11:31, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: To me it seems that Bread Ninja is extorting editors of the list so that she can add the song lists into those articles against their wishes. Otherwise I'm going to stay out of this debate. --193.166.71.86 (talk) 15:13, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
In this discussion, we can state whatever we want is best for the article, merge, redirect, delete, or keep. but back on topic:
Out of all the music games i have yet to see a list of lists. lists shouldn't be redundant. for example, even though this article is in danger of getting nominated for deletion as well, List of Dance Dance Revolution songs doesn't repeat the songs because it's a list of all the songs that were introduced in dance dance revolution series (this however doesn't have any sources and could be deleted). However do not list the track listing that each game has. Another example is List of songs in Guitar Hero that reached notability but not only that but it is far too much information as the article is featured and getting around 60 KB of info. However, none of the DJMax articles are even close to get to that. Not only that but there's a collapse template to hide it so that can always save visual space. Problem is, we can't just make articles like this despite not being notable.Bread Ninja (talk) 13:27, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
We should improve this track list article to be like that List of Dance Dance Revolution songs. I already had something like that in my mind and wrote about that to you already. --Mikitei (talk) 17:30, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. here's the thing. the list isn't an independent list-article. It's dependent on the main articles about the video games. So, if the main articles are not notable than the article can't stay regardless of notability. Why would we do this? because the list article is supporting material for the main article. IF the main article isn't notable, than the information could be merged so it would gain some-notability if not to a significant degree to not delete it (not saying I will delete it).
As for list of Dance Dance Revolution songs. i'm not even sure that one "could" be notable, as it just compiles all the songs that were released. Seems like original research supported by information that doesn't exactly reflect the article if it were to assume notability.Bread Ninja (talk) 17:56, 20 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: So practically this leads to only one thing. I don't want these lists into those DJMAX articles. You, Bread Ninja, don't want this list of lists article (which I can understand to some degree). We have two options. Either we make separate article pages (one for each list) or remove all these lists. First option still doesn't solve the problem that we don't have reliable way to source all this material using English language sources. Any kind of merge operation isn't going to solve that one. Consider that if decision to delete this article is made based on missing sources. --Mikitei (talk) 10:54, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The reason we have song lists for GH, RB, and the other music games is that these are notable and widely recognized songs by recognized artists; there have been references that show songs featured in such games get additional sales boosts from inclusion, so its more than just useful. In this specific list, I'm not seeing many blue links and suspect there can't be many made. This doesn't invalidate the list of tracks, but judging by the size of the individual game articles, there's no need for a separate list. --MASEM (t) 15:45, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
From this point on, let's not use WP:OTHERCRAP. It always backfires because the comparisons are never exact.Bread Ninja (talk) 19:23, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Merge or delete (either way, not keep). Simply does not have a strong assertion of notability to have an article like the Rock Band or Guitar Hero lists. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 22:22, 19 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 02:18, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Strong strong (heh, I went there!): No, either delete or merge to individual articles. I could not find independent reliable sources that would satisfy the general notability criteria – leaning towards delete since the game articles also look pretty obscure and non-notable. Prime Blue (talk) 15:53, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comment yes I've also been looking for a while and couldn't find much that could be considered reliable sources. I hope the accusation of me not attempting to find sources is dropped with this. For the most part, i think it depends on how much potential the article has. If there's no sign of ever gaining any citation, than delete, if it has "some" citation and somehow notable on its own (depending if the main articles have enough support to stand on its own) than merge due to the main articles not having much. But the only way to keep this article is if somehow the main articles were notable up to at least start and over 60 KB (per WP:SPLIT) which i highly doubt will happen anytime soon.Bread Ninja (talk) 18:27, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: You can find sources to these tracks on Japanese and Korean websites if you know where to look. Problem with those is that they are mostly improper blogs and wiki-like sites for gamers. To my knowledge Pentavision who develops DJMAX series has never released "officially" a list of all included songs when they have released new title. However they have websites about these games and some list more or less songs from the game. For example Black Square website lists 35 tracks from the game and gives audio and visual art samples on each song too. Just for the sake of example the website for first DJMAX Portable lists all 54 songs from the game (with audio and visual art samples on all of them). Just because Bread Ninja doesn't find sources it doesn't mean these lists cannot be sourced. The main problem is that finding proper English language sources is probably impossible due the fact that none of these games have never been released outside Korea/Japan/China-axis apart from Fever and Portable 3 which PlayMaker Studios published in Northern America... One way to source these lists is using game manuals. Some of the DJMAX games have a manual which lists all the tracks the game has. But those aren't probably proper sources... Most of these lists can be sourced properly, probably. I don't know if everything can be sourced. That would require a team effort from everybody in this thread to find out if it is possible. --Mikitei (talk) 10:54, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're not really helping yourself in this situation. And like i said before, if the article does sustain notability, there's still the problem of the main video game articles not being notable. the main video games would have to be notable (and over 60 KB at least) in order to keep this as a support list article.Bread Ninja (talk) 17:07, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment:I think you're wrong about that. That comment was merely a additional remark to your comment which stated that you couldn't find reliable sources. I refuted that by writing that there are sources in non-English websites. You're also forgetting that these articles are still in development stages. And this is notable game series in Korea among music games. I think I wrote about this before but I think you're not constructive enought. :) --Mikitei (talk) 20:14, 26 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Leaning towards delete: The list is in pretty bad shape sourcing-wise, and the duplication of the content is discouraged per Wikipedia:Content forking. The fact that other such lists exist only mean that a model is available to follow, not that other such lists can exist without proper sourcing. I understand that there is a reason that the lists shouldn't be in the separate game articles, but a separate list still needs to follow our notability and sourcing guidelines.
    I didn't do a search of sources, so I'll gladly change my tune if proper sourcing is found. But right now, I did not see enough sources presented in the article or this AfD. (Guyinblack25 talk 19:24, 22 April 2011 (UTC))[reply]
  • Comment: Let's wait few more days to get full two weeks on this. I wish that because DJMAX articles are slow to get updates. Only I and you, Bread Ninja, have been active on them lately. It would be fair to give slower article a longer time. --Mikitei (talk) 20:14, 26 April 2011 (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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/List_of_DJMax_track_listings&oldid=1077429113"