Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Speak of the Devil 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 keep. Per Donaldd23's comment; there seems to be agreement that Doomsdayer520 can improve the article to an acceptable level. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 18:32, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speak of the Devil Tour[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Unsourced concert tour fails both WP:GNG and WP:CONCERT TOUR that has tags on it needing both additional citations for verification since December 2015 and insufficient inline citations from 4 years ago as of this month. Pahiy (talk) 20:40, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions. Pahiy (talk) 20:40, 14 August 2020 (UTC) [reply]

Keep. Found the following sources [[1]], [[2]], and [[3]]. Just because article doesn't have sources listed does not mean they don't exist. Did you do a WP:BEFORE? Donaldd23 (talk) 02:32, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per WP:NEXIST and WP:NOTCLEANUP. The tags on the article are reasons to improve it if sources exist, and they do exist as found by the above voter. Remember the WP:BEFORE process as well. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 14:32, 15 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, T. Canens (talk) 04:56, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, MBisanz ^talk 15:36, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (previous voter) - I am willing to clean up this article and add the sources found by the other voter above, if/when it survives this process. Don't see the need for all these re-listings, when we seem to have a basic consensus calling for improvement rather than deletion. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (Talk|Contribs) 20:29, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree. Two "keep" votes, no dissenting votes and several citations pointed out. Why has this been relisted twice? Donaldd23 (talk) 15:39, 4 September 2020 (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.