Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Luther Tour

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 merge to List of Luther Vandross tours. slakr^\ talk / 02:47, 5 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Luther Vandross tours[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Not convinced these are noteworthy tours for Luther Vandross. The tours do not appear to have multiple reliable sources about the tour itself, merely reviews of individual stops. The other tours nominated as a group are below. Thargor Orlando (talk) 21:06, 27 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 13:43, 28 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, czar ♔ 02:29, 5 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Keep All - Upon reviewing the sources in some of these articles, some of the tours actually do appear to have received WP:SIGCOV in multiple, reliable sources. It would be better to assess each article more closely and perform sources searches as suggested in section D of WP:BEFORE, after which time then renominate those that haven't received SIGCOV accordingly. Those that actually don't meet notability guidelines could be merged to List of Luther Vandross tours. NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:18, 6 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]
- I hate the use of this BEFORE essay that implies the research hasn't been done. Can you please show which of these tours have received said coverage about the tours that aren't simply local reviews? They have been reviewed, so if I missed them, you should be able to point them out. Thargor Orlando (talk) 18:06, 7 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

merge/redirect all to Luthor Vandross. Saying a tour happened, and here were the dates/locations is not of encyclopedic value. Give a sentence or two about each tour in the main article. That is sufficient, unless there is significant commentary/content on one of them.

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 14:53, 13 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all ~~with Luthor Vandross;~~ to List of Luther Vandross tours; separate articles are not needed. Fylbecatulous talk 14:09, 17 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How about the notion of merging to List of Luther Vandross tours? NorthAmerica¹⁰⁰⁰ 11:28, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Basically a permastub that I'd argue should merge into Luther Vandross if this content is kept in any form. Thargor Orlando (talk) 13:23, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The list of tours is more feasible than all these individual articles; which really need to be put somewhere, rather than continuing to stand alone. Upon reconsideration I will amend my merge above to reflect the list as my preference. I do hope the list can be expanded with more text and sources to fend off the permastub declaration. Fylbecatulous talk 13:39, 24 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached. I know we don't normally do a third relist, but given the number of articles involved, I think it's worth one more attempt to form a real consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, -- RoySmith (talk) 17:34, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Merge all to List of Luther Vandross tours. →Davey2010→→Talk to me!→ 10:39, 26 May 2014 (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.