Talk:Alcide Nunez

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Alcide Nunez. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120415065234/http://www.hurricanebrassband.nl/Musician%20alcide%20nunez.htm to http://www.hurricanebrassband.nl/Musician%20alcide%20nunez.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 04:18, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

Weary Blues Merge proposal by User:Vmavanti
User:Vmavanti has posted a proposal for Weary Blues to be merged into the Alcide Nunez article (but has thus far offered no explanation as to why). No.  I object to this proposal, and suggest it be closed promptly. Nunez did not compose the tune. He was in the band that made the first jazz recording of the number, but that is not the most famous recording of the number. -- Infrogmation (talk) 19:21, 6 July 2019 (UTC) Vmavanti (talk) 22:32, 6 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Where would you like to see it merged?

Vmavanti (talk) 17:21, 8 July 2019 (UTC) Vmavanti (talk) 04:31, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * I see no reason why it needs to be merged at all. The article on the composer, Artie Matthews, seems to me a much better place if there was a need to merge.  Why not leave it as a separate article? -- Infrogmation (talk) 15:49, 8 July 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you believe that the article Weary Blues as it stands now is a good article?
 * Not a "Good article", just a useful article to have on Wikipedia. -- Infrogmation (talk) 03:52, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
 * That was not my question. Nor are you supposed to use "a useful article to have on Wikipedia" as the basis for your judgment. We judge by notability here. You have not mentioned the most obvious point of all. This article has had NO SOURCES since it was created ELEVEN YEARS AGO. I see no reason to wait another eleven years for someone to get off their keester and actually do something about it. We delete this article or we merge it. Take your pick.
 * I thought I specifically had answered your question; sorry if my attempt at replying was not what you were looking for. Thank you for finally explaining why you think the article ought to be merged.  I already expressed my opinion of what I consider a much more reasonable existing article for it to be merged into should "merge" be the decision.  Cheers.  -- Infrogmation (talk) 18:26, 9 July 2019 (UTC)