Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Avro Vulcan XH558 post-restoration public appearances


 * 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 Avro Vulcan XH558. Actually, the consensus is more like "not keep", because the clear majority here don't want to keep this list around separately, but opinions are split between delete and merge. The way to accomodate this is to redirect, allowing the editorial process to work out what, if anything, is mergeworthy.  Sandstein  19:25, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

List of Avro Vulcan XH558 post-restoration public appearances

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I initially only created this list for size reasons, just to get it out of the way while I was making improvements to the main article. Since XH558 is now permanently grounded, and given every individual post-restoration appearance seems to have generated coverage in reliable independent sources, the time seems right to consider once and for all whether or not it should be completed and polished, or dumped. The only point of debate seems to be WP:LISTN. Natural Ratio (talk) 22:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep (creator and nominator) I'd say the LISTN case is marginal if only considering non-specialist sources, but in the case of supplementary lists like this, I think it's better to let readers decide whether or not they want to read it, rather than presume that it would be of no use to readers at all in the face of such overwhelming interest in both the main topic, and indeed in each individual entry on the list (even if the latter only proves to be through contemporary news sources in the general coverage sense). It's not like maintenance or future expansion is a factor - once completed to the necessary standards, that will be that. Natural Ratio (talk) 22:07, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  Musa  Talk  22:21, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep Is there any single valid point to that rationale? Andy Dingley (talk) 22:26, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Apologies, I thought I had said this in the above, but I appear to have dumped it before posting - the point is to settle the debate conclusively, in case that's what's stopping anyone else from putting the time in to complete it. It's certainly given me pause. Whether that's valid or not, I don't know. All I know is, if there's no positive conclusion, then I'm certainly not going to work on it (others might, that's up to them to take that risk). But based on past experience, simply asking for views on the talk page was unlikely to lead to a firm conclusion (witness the Background section debate I started on the main article, which despite being widely advertised, still 'concluded' with people both strenuously arguing that it both should and should not have one). While in that situation I was able to work around other people's inability to compromise or even revisit the discussion, and instead decided to do something else to work around them, there's obviously no such way to move forward wwth a third option on the issue of whether or not this list should exist (working on it anyway and just hoping nobody deletes it is not a compromise, it's just stupidity). Natural Ratio (talk) 23:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Maybe this Vulcan is a rock star among aircraft, but even rock stars don't get lists of performances. This is fancruft. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:09, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * If that's the analogy you're going with, it seems to prove the exact opposite of what you're saying, see Category:Concert tours by artist - it seems accepted practice that rock star level artists merit a separate list (sometimes even multiple lists) of each one of their performances on Wikipedia. And it's worth noting that XH558 has often been described as the "rock star" of the air display scene, and the pilot has even said he feels almost like a rock star given the reaction it generates at shows. I would not advocate creating such lists for all display aircraft/teams, but it's not really in doubt that if they were to only be created for the really famous ones, XH558 would be one of them. Indeed, its notability as a display aircraft is the only reason it even has its own article on Wikipedia out of all other Vulcans, since it didn't do anything else notable (I know XM655 also has an article, but as of right now that has zero independent sources, so could arguably be deleted as not-notable). Natural Ratio (talk) 23:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
 * No, to stick with the analogy, tours are not the same as performances. I mean, if somebody performs on Saturday Night Live or The Tonight Show, is that worth noting? Clarityfiend (talk) 12:25, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Those tour pages include lists of performances - that was exactly my point. For rock stars, Wikipedia considers every performance to be worth noting. You can't compare this to appearances on TV chat shows - the whole point of a display aircraft is to make public appearances, just like the whole point of a rock star is to appear live on stage. It is not the main purpose of a musician or actor or whoever to appear on a chat show. Natural Ratio (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Uh no. Saturday Night Live is not a chat show, and it is a relatively big deal for musicians to perform on both these shows on national television. A few appearances are undoubtedly notable (e.g. the Beatles and Elvis on The Ed Sullivan Show), but the vast majority aren't, same as the Vulcan in air shows. Clarityfiend (talk) 22:54, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * We'll have to agree to disagree then - I think it's extremely obvious what the difference is between the Vulcan appearing at a display/flypast and a musician appearing on a chat show. And it is a chat show, since it's primary purpose is to give guests a platform to promote themselves as a form of TV entertainment in between guest interviews, so that people are motivated by by tickets to their real shows, the tours dates etc. If it really was something that was analogous to airshows, then you're basically saying the only reason the Vulcan appears at one show, it to persuade people to go see it at other shows. Which makes no sense at all. Each show is the show. Just like each tour date is the tour. Natural Ratio (talk) 02:02, 25 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete, I see no evidence that this is a notable enough stand-alone list subject. The comparison to rock stars tours is not apt: for most occasions, it is more like "appearances on festivals", not making a solo tour. Some of the sources don't even seem to mention the Vulcan (the first I checked was ), which obviously isn't a good sign. To me, this is a list of excessive detail. Major appearances can be listed in the main article on the plane (which has a substantial section on "displays" already), but a list of every single appearance? Fram (talk) 07:56, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Don't judge the list by the state it is in now - it took me 5 seconds to find a source for Goodwood 2011 from the very same paper - Goodwood Festival of Speed 2011: Vulcan bomber to thrill Goodwood crowds..."The aircraft gave a show-stopping display in 2010 and has once again been invited to bring its unique spectacle to West Sussex." And as I said above, the rock star analogy is unfortunately very apt. Every tour appearance and every festival appearance, they'll all be recorded on Wikipedia somewhere if the musician is famous enough. And please note, the display section was largely written by me, and I was basically going on nothing but personal opinion - I don't profess to know which ones are major or not. Do you? Is appearing at Goodwood more or less major than Farnbrough or RIAT or anniversary flypasts, etc? To my eye, you could quite easily define at least half of the appearances as major in some way, so why not list them all, simply for completeness? Natural Ratio (talk) 16:45, 24 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete individual displays are not really notable and anything that needs a mention should already be in the Avro Vulcan XH558 article. Like other individual and no less iconic aircraft that have articles on wikipedia an individual display or flypast is unlikely to be notable and nearly all of these and just run of the mill stuff for a display aircraft. MilborneOne (talk) 17:51, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
 * See the question right above - I can see no feasible way to determine which appearances were important and which were run of the mill, it's only going to be my guesswork. If you're happy with that, please say so, because I'm kind of getting sick of being ignored on here. I do intend to take the XH558 article to a quality review, and if the question is asked, how did you select what displays to mention, I don't really have a good answer right now. Also, it should be obvious here that the question is whether or not a list of displays is notable, not whether individual displays are. Natural Ratio (talk) 02:02, 25 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge back to Avro Vulcan XH558. I do wonder what the purpose of this AfD is. The nominator is also the article creator (in that he split this from the main Vulcan article), and has !voted to keep this article. The nominator is also arguing against both Keep and Delete !votes. This just seems like WP:Disruptive time wasting. Martin 4 5 1  00:11, 25 November 2015 (UTC)
 * The purpose was to establish if there was a positive consensus for it to exist, before I spent the time needed to finish it and get it into some kind of decent shape. I'm addressing people's reasons to keep or delete to make sure people have thought it through properly. Since it already appears obvious there is not much support for it to exist, I'm glad I did it, otherwise it would have been me wasting my time. I'm not sure if that counts as disruption to you though? Also, please note, a completed list would be far too big to merge back - I estimate around 160 appearances overall, but that's just a guesstimate based on 20 per season, so it's really not going to happen, not as a comprehensive list anyway. Natural Ratio (talk)
 * I will note that this is not what AfD is for - indeed "the nominator does not advance a rationale for deletion]] is Speedy Keep rationale No. 1. If you believe there needs to be a discussion as to whether or not an article you think should exist, should exist, then you need to have that discussion on the article's talk page - creating an AfD for that purpose is, in fact, disruptive to the AfD process. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:32, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment the behaviour of the nominator and myself are now being discussed at WP:ANI wrt this and one other AfD. Martin 4 5 1  01:13, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Aviation-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 09:18, 25 November 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. or merge somewhere, or move to Wikia. This is overcoverage, and does not justify a separate article. we're not a fan publication.
 * In the interests of clarity, can you please confirm that you're fully aware of how long I estimate the completed list would be (re. your suggestion it could be merged), and the reliability/independence of sources that I propose to use to complete it, if kept (re. your suggestion it's only of interest to fans). Natural Ratio (talk) 19:45, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Merging doesn't necessarily mean keeping all of it, one can (and usually should) merge only the most important bits. So whether this page is complete or only one-tenth of the max length does not invalidate a "merge" opinion in any case. Fram (talk) 20:21, 30 November 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, but since nobody has yet bothered to explain what constitutes a major/important appearance and what was just "run of the mill", and as I have detailed at length above, there is already a Display section in the main article which lists some appearances, I was assuming those arguing to merge meant the whole table. Natural Ratio (talk) 17:22, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Anotherclown (talk) 12:17, 1 December 2015 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Sandstein   19:07, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. as the OP says, this hinges on WP:LISTN. And it fails. There is no evidence that this list is in itself a notable topic (for example as the subject of magazine articles rather than being tucked into an article about the aircraft), irrespective of its individual entries. Whether such a list could survive as a section in the parent machine's article is a different issue, which can not be tested at AfD. &mdash; Cheers, Steelpillow (Talk) 11:32, 3 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Merge back to Avro Vulcan XH558, and then open a disussion on Talk:Avro Vulcan XH558 as to whether or not it should be retained or removed altogether. - The Bushranger One ping only 06:32, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * 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.