Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pink Floyd trivia (2nd nomination)

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 Pink Floyd, edit history remains intact. Merge at editors' discretion. See WP:NOT and WP:TRIVIA for rationale of closure. — Nearly Headless Nick ^{C} 14:29, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Pink Floyd trivia[edit]

Article is 100% WP:OR. The nature of the content makes it perpetually unverifiable except by OR. Also, Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, and trivia is, by nature, an indiscriminate collection of information. The Parsnip! 17:18, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Merge any marginally encyclopedic factoids into Pink Floyd, and delete.--John 17:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete and do John's suggestion. Fails WP:NOT Whs itc hy 17:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, and obey John. --Evb-wiki 17:51, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete I'm unable to find reliable sources for any of this. JoshuaZ 18:01, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge, but leaning towards delete A lot of information there, but poorly presented. Floyd are too important for this to be destroyed - IF it was sourced. Merge most of it into the relevant album/song articles. Stuff on who covered Interstellar Overdrive isn't needed in it's own article, for example. And using that as an example, the info is duplicated in the song's article anyway. Does anyone really need to know a list of "lengthy recordings"? The correct answer is no, by the way. *edit* infact, from what I can see, most of it is already in the articles it refers to (check the South Park ref, etc, etc), Lugnuts 18:32, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Move to a subpage of Talk:Pink Floyd and keep. I agree that most of this stuff isn't very good. Much of it may never really belong in an encyclopedia article. Some of it might, and the material is largely self-referencing; sound clips and lyric quotes in other published sources don't need any further references than noting where else they appeared. But deletion is not the only or best way to deal with lists of factoids that are thought to clutter up articles in chief; and someone may ultimately find themes in this material into which lists of examples might be woven. - Smerdis of Tlön 21:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. Another one of this trivia articles. Useight 22:28, 4 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Remamed if it's son necessary, but this is pretty useful for PF fans. --69.79.50.122 04:36, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The article should probably be reworked to be more encyclopedic, but most of the material here is stuff that is interesting and do not fit any other place. Much of the material should probably be deleted, but that does not defend deleting the whole article. Coq Rouge 11:46, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
delete per WP:TRIVIA "Lists of facts, as found in trivia sections, are better presented within the context of the text rather than in a section of unrelated items." seems to indicate anything encylopedic shld be integrated into the band's article. ⇒ bsnowball 12:04, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge Remove unsourced material and what's left can be mergted into main article.Nomen Nescio^{Gnothi seauton} 14:13, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Haven't we been here before? Merge and redirect to Pink Floyd. --Dennis The Tiger (Rawr and stuff) 19:22, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletions. -- John Vandenberg 21:02, 7 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete or Merge notable information into main article. Creating separate trivia articles for musicians sets a very bad precedent though. --musicpvm 01:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Merge -- anything useful into the main Pink Floyd article and redirect. I understand this article was created as the main article on Pink Floyd became too large to manage, but trivia seems to be on the way out of Wikipedia, and this is the best suggestion I can offer of keeping the interesing and useful bits. -- Longhair\^talk 01:20, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, the title of the article says it all I would think. RFerreira 06:21, 10 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Delete, but disagree with the nominator. The article is not 100% original research (more like 50%). It is almost 100% insignificant, but it is not original research to write that Homer Simpson says the words "Pink Floyd" in episode 13 of season 5 (hypothetical example). That can be easily verified by simply watching that episode. I think the article ought to be deleted rather than merged. Pink Floyd is a featured article and it would be difficult to merge this into it without compromising the quality of the target. -- Black Falcon ^(Talk) 20:42, 10 June 2007 (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.