Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Music of Carmen


 * 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 of the debate was delete. --Sam Blanning(talk) 12:26, 22 May 2006 (UTC)

Music of Carmen
Unneccessary, with a list of pieces in the Carmen article itself. No encyclopaedic value, being merged with the Carmen article. --Alexs letterbox 01:31, 24 April 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. This AFD was begun by the original author of the page, who then changed his or her mind and prodded it. The prod tag was removed, but since this AFD subpage exists, the AFD should be considered active.  I am listing it now. Chick Bowen 15:50, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete. Agree with the comment by Alexs letterbox on the talk page "It is really more of a guide to the opera, rather than an encyclopaedic article".-- blue 520  16:12, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Transwiki to Wikisource...then Redirect to Carmen. This could have been done boldly without the AfD...--Isotope23 16:33, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * The images would have to be moved to commons too, of course. I'll get to this eventually if no one else does it first, but I'm not familiar with Wikisource's way of doing things.  Chick Bowen 17:34, 8 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Yeah, Transwiki the text to Wikisource and the images to Commons, then redirect to Carmen. --Sherool (talk) 10:28, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Transwiki. Could be a very useful resource, and belongs on some Wikimedia project, just not here. &mdash;Simetrical (talk • contribs) 19:24, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Having looked over the projects, Wikisource is not the place for this at all. b:Wikibooks:What is Wikibooks allows any instructional resource within the limits of WP:NOR, WP:NPOV, and WP:V (all of which Wikibooks follows too), or at least any instructional resource on at least a very slightly academic topic (Jimbo's cracking down on videogame manuals, from what I hear, but this is undoubtedly fine).  s:Wikisource:What is Wikisource? excludes original writings by contributors. &mdash;Simetrical (talk • contribs) 19:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

''This AfD is being relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so that consensus may be reached. Please add new discussion below this notice. Thanks!'' Deathphoenix ʕ 02:04, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Transwiki the text to Wikisource and the images to Commons, then redirect to Carmen, as per Sherool. Vizjim 09:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikisource does not accept things written by its contributors. Please see s:Wikisource:What is Wikisource?, which I linked to above.  The only place for this on Wikimedia is Wikibooks. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * OK, delete. Vizjim 14:33, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Er, what about Wikibooks? —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 20:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment: Please be sure that it violates no copyright before transwikiing. Wikisource has received some transwikied articles that have turned out to be copyvios.--Jusjih 14:57, 16 May 2006 (UTC) (admin at multilingual Wikisource and English Wikisource)
 * All the text is my own, and no sources were used in its preparation. --Alexs letterbox 21:36, 16 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Weak delete belongs more in publications like Wordsworth Book of Opera, but may be a useful resource. M1ss1ontomars2k4 | T | C | @ 02:34, 17 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Whatever you do, don't transwiki to Wikibooks. Anything else is fine with me. Thanks. -- Mark Neelstin (Dark Mark)  00:34, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Um, why? —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 04:59, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Wikibooks is for textbooks... not just Wikipedia's junk they don't want. Thanks. -- Mark Neelstin (Dark Mark)  20:58, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * This would be suitable for inclusion in a textbook for a course on opera, surely? Those include at least partial listening guides for at least some operas, to judge by my music textbook.  Of course, the book fragment would probably sit for ages without anyone actually trying to format it as a textbook and add other required things (like an introduction and actual discussion of opera generally), but it's still potentially part of a useful textbook.  Eventualism, anyone? —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 18:49, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Commnent If no suitale Wikimedia project accept this kind of thing then delete it, but it seems like a waste to delete if it can be transwikied somewhere, but it doesn't belong on Wikipedia so delete if all else fail (are there aany GFDL compatable Opera wikis on Wikicities?). --Sherool (talk) 09:45, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It looks to me like Wikibooks is the place for this. It will have to be reformatted, of course. —Simetrical (talk • contribs) 20:37, 18 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Delete as per the wish of the original author of the page. He can submit it to another wiki site if he feels like it.—Tokek 09:04, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm not that fussed really on what happens to it. If room is found for it somewhere, I will finish the page; if not, c'est la vie. --Alexs letterbox 06:24, 22 May 2006 (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.