Wikipedia:Categories for deletion/1 hit wonders

Bad idea. Categories should be immediately verifiable through objective criteria. Something as subjective as classifying one hit wonders is better handled in list articles, such as One-hit wonders in the United States, One-hit wonders in Canada, and One-hit wonders in the UK. Rhobite 04:40, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)

At a minimum, the category is named poorly (1 vs. one). Different people have different criteria for what would be considered a "one-hit wonder", so I agree that lists are probably better - although I'm not entirely convinced we really need even that. Delete the category, move anything that's not already listed to the apporpriate lists. --Azkar 05:14, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete per Azkar. And note that several related articles (e.g. 0-hit, 1.5-hit and 2-hit wonders) are currently under heavy fire on VfD, so if there are cats for them we should get rid of those too. Radiant _* 10:22, Apr 8, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. I'm not sure how much more objective you can get: "Do they have exactly one hit, or not?" However, it probably does belong in a list. -Kbdank71 14:49, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- The definition of a hit is rather arbitrary and subjective. --SPUI (talk) 03:47, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
There is a $417load of one hit wonders in this whole whopping world! I think we should keep it. --TheSamurai 03:43, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete, ambiguous and not universal (eg pop stars who are one-hit wonders in the US but megastars in the UK). -Sean Curtin 03:58, Apr 9, 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Postdlf 05:11, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Delete. Better dealt with in lists. -- Lochaber 09:15, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)