Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/British Winter Tour '74
Source: 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 redirect to ]
British Winter Tour '74
AfDs for this article:
- )
Non-notable tour. While the band is certainly notable, the article is just a list of tour dates, with nothing to suggest that the tour itself is notable as per
]- Delete, a non-notable tour that fails to satisfy the ]
- Delete: trivial coverage, non-notable. talk) 05:22, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and merge with 2 18:19, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- But nothing that you mention actually constitutes "substantial coverage". Mostly it's writings about the band coming from people and sources that write about the band, and write about the tour BECAUSE they write about the band. Pink Floyd has a very devout fan following, and because of that nearly every part of their history has been covered in detail by these sources. However, this is not "substantial third-party coverage" that proves notability per the tour's notability cannot be inherited from the notability of the album. Rwiggum (Talk/Contrib) 22:09, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you read the articles by Nick Kent, Pete Erskine, Chris Charlesworth, Karl Dallas and Derek Jewell to state they're not substantial enough? And I don't think the New Musical Express, the Melody Maker and The Sunday Times only write about Pink Floyd at all. Did you even read my notes (not to mention a bit of own research) or did you just copy your comment under all my !votes? Please note that the cited books mainly reflect newspaper and magazine articles, especially Schaffner's book, while MacDonald's book is basically a collection of important articles and interviews. Sorry, but it's much easier to buy a few books than collecting myriads of old newspapers, don't you think so? But I guess most of those articles could be found on the internet, too. [2] [3] and more: [4] [5] --Avant-garde a clue-2 23:23, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Did you read the articles by Nick Kent, Pete Erskine, Chris Charlesworth, Karl Dallas and Derek Jewell to state they're not substantial enough? And I don't think the New Musical Express, the Melody Maker and The Sunday Times only write about Pink Floyd at all. Did you even read my notes (not to mention a bit of own research) or did you just copy your comment under all my !votes? Please note that the cited books mainly reflect newspaper and magazine articles, especially Schaffner's book, while MacDonald's book is basically a collection of important articles and interviews. Sorry, but it's much easier to buy a few books than collecting myriads of old newspapers, don't you think so? But I guess most of those articles could be found on the internet, too. [2] [3] and more: [4] [5] --Avant-garde a clue-
- But nothing that you mention actually constitutes "substantial coverage". Mostly it's writings about the band coming from people and sources that write about the band, and write about the tour BECAUSE they write about the band. Pink Floyd has a very devout fan following, and because of that nearly every part of their history has been covered in detail by these sources. However, this is not "substantial third-party coverage" that proves notability per
- Note: This debate has been included in the 2 19:05, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete: nothing inherently notable about this tour, a list of dates without explanation. A-Kartoffel (talk) 03:08, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep and merge with Pink Floyd French Summer Tour 1974 into Pink Floyd Tours/1974--Buster7 (talk) 05:26, 8 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete, a short concert tour not even used to promote any releases. Pink floyd had some huge tours but sadly this isn't one of them. TheClashFan (talk) 10:56, 9 April 2009 (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.