Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of performances on Top of the Pops


 * 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 20:07, 6 May 2009 (UTC)

List of performances on Top of the Pops

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

Completely unsourced list with little useful information. Whilst I would agree that a verifiable list of performances with details such as transmission dates would be useful, this is nothing of the kind. It needs some kind of official BBC playlist sourcing. From the talk page it appears the primary source for this list is extracts shown on "Top Of The Pops 2" which (a) does not provide the original transmission date, and (b) isn't necessarily a 100% reliable indication that TOTP ever showed the act (for reasons unknown it may have been edited out / not shown due to technical problems etc). As nothing in the article is reliable it should be removed and recreated only if it can be done so with references. I42 (talk) 11:17, 29 April 2009 (UTC)

As this would be useful if properly sourced, shouldn't it be marked for cleanup rather than delete? 217.40.170.134 (talk) 13:08, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * As none of it is reliably sourced then cleanup would mean removing everything; anything not so removed would taint any "good" content. I42 (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Reluctant Delete Unless refences can be found i don't think this can be kept unforunatly. Tresiden (talk) 19:29, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep AfD is not cleanup. Tag it for references (or better still, try to find them yourself!)  Lugnuts  (talk) 07:04, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep There are hundreds of books which might be used as sources and no doubt thousands of other references of other sorts. None of this information seems controversial as it was a major chart show.  If the nominator wants to improve the article, he will finding working on it more productive than bringing it here. Colonel Warden (talk) 19:10, 30 April 2009 (UTC)
 * This is a common reaction, and yet one which is not supported by policy. In the absence of me or anyone else providing sources (and this AfD gives a week for that to happen) then deletion must ensue. This is spelled out in WP:BURDEN. Either we should delete the article completely or pare it back to nothing, and only what is verifiable should be re-added. The latter could be done without an AfD it is true, but as would effectively be deletion I considered that this should only be done with consensus. I42 (talk) 08:04, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:BURDEN states If no reliable, third-party sources can be found for an article topic, Wikipedia should not have an article on it. But we see that there are many such sources and so we're good.  What you're talking about are the individual entries, but that is a matter of content editing not deletion.  The place to discuss them is the article's talk page. Colonel Warden (talk) 09:41, 1 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Colonel Warden showed the sources exist. The need to provide the sources has been met; after that WP:NODEADLINE applies. That said, the list isn't actually complete. When a TOTP producer said he hated] S Club Juniors and didn't want to put them on the show, it was regarding their first single "One Step Closer" which isn't listed. I have no idea if they actually performed Puppy Love on the show. - Mgm|(talk) 09:19, 1 May 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.