Talk:List of The Christmas Song covers

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

#REDIRECT [[Talk:The Christmas Song]]





I see that this article was created in good faith, but it is unreferenced, the list is now duplicated (more or less) back at the main article, and, perish the though, every song with a couple of different recorded versions gets split this way. --Richhoncho (talk) 21:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The way I see it is perish the thought of every song article having an endless listcruft of covers polluting it. This list is ridiculously long, unreferenced, and attracts people wanting to add their favorite band or artist. The best thing to do in these situations is to follow Wikipedia:Article size guidelines and do a split. -- Ϫ 20:33, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And Wikipedia:Article size guidelines specifically states, amongst other things, that "ridiculously long, unreferenced, and attracts people wanting to add" 'trivia' is NOT a reason to split an article. I can't see what the problem is! --Richhoncho (talk) 06:49, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Uhm, no it does not state that. In fact, it suggests that the better alternative would be to just remove the offending section altogether rather than split it. I chose to preserve the offending content by splitting it out even though it may be trivial, you want to merge the offending content back into the main article even though it would make the article disproportionate, in a way both of our approaches are skirting the edges of the various guidelines on splitting and summary style. I wouldn't be surprised if the third opinion comes to a compromise of just deleting this article and merging only a very limited amount of covers into the main article. -- Ϫ 07:22, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have no problem with trimming trivia, much better than giving it legs to walk on. Too late to trim now you have taken it to 3rd party - unless you want to do it... Richhoncho (talk) 07:39, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
PS. The guidelines say, Breaking out an unwanted section - If a section of an article is a magnet for unhelpful contributions (such as the "external links" section or trivia sections), be aware that while moving it to another article may help to clean up the main article, it creates a new article that consists entirely of a section for unwanted contributions. If an article includes an unwanted section, or unwanted information, it is better to remove that content than to create a new article for it. This is what I paraphrased above, I can't see how you can think this doesn't cover this list of covers. Richhoncho (talk) 07:53, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Your original position was to merge the entire contents back in to the article, not to remove it, remember? I initially thought about removing it altogether but considered salvaging it instead by doing the split. At least this way we still have the list of covers to work with when deciding which are the important ones and which we can reference. Another alternative would be to just copy the list of covers to the talk page and work from there. -- Ϫ 08:09, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My position was to merge only because I don't like splitting directly related articles and I am not particularly a deletionist (although I often applaud it in others). The list needs trimming in any event back to notable covers, all the redlinks, wrong links, people who happened to perform the song (whether live or on tv) once or twice et al should be removed. That pretty much leaves us with a manageable list which could easily slip back into the main article. I hope I am right in saying we both fully agree the "list" is a pretty useless article in itself, and I would also add the split from the main article it is rather pointless and creates duplicate categorization. I would have no objections whatsoever if you edited accordingly. The other alternative, from my point of view, would be to take it to AfD, as already muted as an option. I don't think there is any need to take the list to a talkpage as whatever happens there will be a historical record at WP. Cheers. Richhoncho (talk) 08:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
We are in agreement. However I'm really not inclined to do the research in trimming it down to just the notables (I know I know.. after all that! :) nor knowledgeable enough about the subject to do it justice. So shall we leave it tagged as is for the time being while someone comes along and does the selective merge? or should we take it to AFD and let the community sort it out? I still think however that we should keep at least a diff-link on the talk page to the main list of covers (in the revision history) just as a reference, to be used for any further expansion, because if this list does get deleted through AFD then it would not be readily apparent to future editors that it once existed, trivial as it may be. -- œ™ 09:04, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Don't think its too much of a problem to reduce to about 20 entries - if that meets your criteria for a merge I'm happy enough to start deleting the nn stuff. BTW I didn't actually merge, only put a redirect on the list page, the rest was duplicated on the main article already! Richhoncho (talk) 09:21, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Be my guest. I guess we can cancel the 3O too. After the selective merge we can just redirect back to that section. -- Ϫ 09:41, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

reduced list[edit]

I think I have picked out (and added info) the major artists, but leaving a few extra in just to show the width of artist that have recorded the song. Used the "what links here" to establish a sort of notability. Please feel free to further edit, use or reject. Richhoncho (talk) 19:17, 11 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good! -- Ϫ 10:08, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_The_Christmas_Song_covers&oldid=1076371164"