Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of multimedia artists

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. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 21:56, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of multimedia artists

I've just created and started populating Cat:Multimedia artists when I found this. However, the list is largely empty, not to mention that half of the entries don't even have their own articles, or have been deleted/deleted and protected. The category should render it redundant, unless anyone can think of a way to give it more depth. Unint 01:59, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

• Delete mostly-empty list. The category looks useful though. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 02:00, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Weak keep and expand. If the list is empty, why not fill it up? The list could help in article development, as it could indicate which multimedia artist articles have or have not yet been created, which is something that can't be done simply by a category. Also, many other related lists currently exist. [1].--TBCTaLk?!? 02:09, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
  • Since the author of the VFD says he is creating a category I don't see how this is a valid reason. A category is much more useful for navigation and research purposes and practically maintains itself. A list really adds no extra functionality in a case like this. --Darkfred ^{Talk to me} 17:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
    • As I stated above, a list could indicate which multimedia artist articles have or have not yet been created, which is something that can't be done by a category, since categories don't include redlinks.--TBCTaLk?!? 19:55, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete This is just a pointless and redundant list. If people want to research multimedia artists they can go to the category listing. --Holdek ^(talk) 05:11, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, this is a case where a category would work better than a list. Also, notice there is a piece which discusses a 'Suzan Hughes' that reads like an advertisement. --LiverpoolCommander 08:17, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, definately redundant when the category is online. + difficult to maintain vs category. --Darkfred ^{Talk to me} 17:01, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete The category seems to cover everything that would be in the article. - Triviaa 19:13, 16 September 2006 (UTC)
• Delete - Cat does the job. Crockspot 00:39, 17 September 2006 (UTC)

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.