Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Ramones concerts


 * 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. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:03, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

List of Ramones concerts

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Unencyclopedic listcruft. &mdash; RHaworth (Talk | contribs) 20:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

Strong Keep Do not believe the list meets any of the criteria for listcruft:
 * The list was created just for the sake of having such a list: There was a request for the list on Talk:Ramones
 * The list is of interest to a very limited number of people: Extremely notable band, page has already been visited 20 times after one day of existance
 * The list is a violation of Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information: notable historic info on a very important band
 * The content is unverifiable or the underlying concept is non-notable: completely verifiable and notable as mentioned
 * The list cannot be expanded beyond a handful of terms: certainly well beyond a handful of entries
 * The list is unlimited and/or unmaintainable: There were a finite number of shows, with no chance of further shows
 * The list has no content beyond links to other articles, so would be better implemented as a (self-maintaining) category: content is an important historical record
 * The list is unencyclopaedic, i.e. it would not be expected to be included in an encyclopaedia: could be included in an encyclopedia of punk or even rock music
 * Determining membership of the list requires adoption of a non-neutral point of view, and reliable sources for avoiding it are not available: completely neutral and verifiable
 * Determining membership of the list involves original research or synthesis of ideas: no original research went into the list
 * The list's membership is volatile and requires a disproportionate amount of effort to keep up to date: historical record of past events, there will be no new Ramones concerts -- J04n(talk page) 22:02, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Delete Absolutely no way in Hell could this ever be sourced. It's indiscriminate and unverifiable. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:42, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: The whole list is sourced to J04n(talk page) 22:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * But that's only one source. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 22:50, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * From the first paragraph verifiability: "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia...has already been published by a reliable source..." There are also bound to be reviews of individual shows, but that IMO goes beyond the threshold J04n(talk page) 23:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 22:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 22:55, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Question Would a list like this, if it were copied verbatim from a single source, constitute a copyright violation?  Them From  Space  23:07, 19 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep The "one" source is unquestionably a high-quality source per our WP:Verifiability policy. Sourcing clearly meets our standards. As the information is essentially raw data (date, location) of public events, the information is not copyrightable. There is nothing copyrightable (e.g., commentary, unique/idiosyncratic presentation of data) that has been duplicated from Bessman. DocKino (talk) 02:21, 20 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Strong keep: I have the Bessman book, and the list is 100% completely verifiable from it. 10lbhammer, with respect, you might want to check the article's references before you declare it "indiscriminate and unferifiable". Bessman is not the only source available; there are other published works on the Ramones which list many of their performances (punk rock is the topic of my masters thesis, and I've collected several volumes covering the Ramones including histories of their performances). As an extremely notable band (considered the first punk rock band, now adopted into the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame), nearly all aspects of their history have been covered by reliable secondary sources, including lists of their gigs. In answer to Themfromspace's question, no it is not copyvio if it is simply a list of places and dates, as lists of raw data are not creative works, and even if it were the list is not copied verbatim from the source (note the creator's comments on the talk page). Jo4n's summation of the article's merits is 100% on the money, and the nominator's rationale is completely invalid, based entirely on not liking it with no basis in any policy or guideline. The article passes all of our core policies and I can't imagine that there's a snowball's chance of anyone being able to prove otherwise. --IllaZilla (talk) 08:10, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sourced, encyclopedic, no convincing argument for deletion.--Michig (talk) 07:26, 21 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - but I would like more than one source. Bearian (talk) 17:31, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - per J04n, not listcruft. Rlendog (talk) 22:40, 23 June 2009 (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.