Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Core Contents Media discography

: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 keep. User withdrew nomination (non-admin closure) Kevin Rutherford (talk) 21:19, 2 April 2013 (UTC)

=[[Core Contents Media discography]]=

:{{la|Core Contents Media discography}} – (View AfDView log{{int:dot-separator}} [http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Core_Contents_Media_discography Stats])

:({{Find sources|Core Contents Media discography}})

This is a list that should stay on the record company's website. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Slashme (talk) 10:18, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:50, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:50, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

:Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:50, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

Can you explain why it's indiscriminate to list the notable albums released by a notable record label? There appear to be quite a lot of them in :Category:Record label discographies, plus we also have :Category:Albums by record label‎ and :Category:Artists by record label, which suggests per WP:CLN that a corresponding system of lists is also appropriate. postdlf (talk) 17:11, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep. This looks like a proper split of their publication discography, just needs polish. It doesn't seem indiscriminate to me. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 18:05, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep as nominator: I honestly didn't realize we kept stuff like that on Wikipedia. How many releases has EMI Records had, and why aren't they in the list? Who's going to add Deutsche Grammophon's over 3000 discs? Isn't this something that would rather fit with Wikidata? --Slashme (talk) 20:28, 1 April 2013 (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.