Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rock is Dead (tour)
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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 per WP:N. Bearian (talk) 16:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Rock is Dead (tour) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)
Marilyn Manson is notable, but why Wikipedia needs this listing of tour dates is unclear to me. It seems to violate WP:NOT (directory, statistics). B. Wolterding (talk) 14:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete There is generally a one to one relationship between tours and albums. I'd say merge with Mechanical Animals, but I don't see any content that would improve the album article other than mentioning the name of the tour. -Verdatum (talk) 16:49, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp (talk) 00:27, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and clean up : Concerts tours by a notable artist are generally notable. But this article needs references, and other sections such as "critical reception", "commercial success"... for example, instead of just having the listing of tour dates. Europe22 (talk) 16:39, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply Generally notable? According to what? Notability needs to be established first through reliable sources, and then use those sources to create the article. I call into question the fact that independent third party reliable sources exist that can provide any content beyond what can be mentioned in the Mechanical Animals article. -Verdatum (talk) 20:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment : I am not familiar with this article, but I'm pretty sure that a concerts tour around the world by a notable artist was the subject of substential coverages in the media at the time. Here is the notability. This article needs sources, but it should be not deleted. Europe22 (talk) 21:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Reply Generally notable? According to what? Notability needs to be established first through reliable sources, and then use those sources to create the article. I call into question the fact that independent third party reliable sources exist that can provide any content beyond what can be mentioned in the Mechanical Animals article. -Verdatum (talk) 20:13, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep as per Europe22 comment. David Pro (talk) 00:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep although notability is not yet established with reliable independent sources, I do believe we should be able to find those sources. Martijn Hoekstra (talk) 15:37, 17 April 2008 (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.
