Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ringmasters of the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus


 * 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   merge to Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 03:58, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Ringmasters of the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This is a long-rambling list of repeated names, which appears pretty indiscriminate to me. What should be kept could be summarised in two lines in the Ringling Bros. and Barnum & Bailey Circus article Ohconfucius (talk) 09:09, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions.  -- TexasAndroid (talk) 12:12, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge to the article about the circus. Although this poorly-executed table can be fixed (note: you can say "1871-78: Dan Costello" instead of Dan Costello Dan Costello Dan Costello Dan Costello Dan Costello Dan Costello Dan Costello Dan Costello), once it's fixed, it would fit into a paragraph.  Mandsford (talk) 12:43, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge but in prose form as Mandsford suggests, and with proper sources. Little value as a table, doesn't need a separate article.--RadioFan (talk) 12:48, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Smerge Selectively merge. Wikipedia does not need a listing of everyone who held any significant job in every notable organization, because Wikipedia is not a directory and should not contain indiscriminate information. If references talk about how this or that ringmaster was important in the operation or development of the circus, then that is a logical part of the article about the circus. It could be argued that without the ringmaster, the show would not go on. But likewise, without the cook, the musical director, the roustabouts, or the locomotive engineer the show would not go on, and I do not expect to see an article listing every locomotive driver or head cook. Edison (talk) 16:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Try to think of the ringmaster of a circus as being similar to the conductor of an orchestra, the producer of a Broadway production, the coach of a professional sports team, or for that matter, the key person in any organization. The ringmaster has somewhat more responsibilities for the show than the average employee.  Mandsford (talk) 17:22, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I dont think the above comments question the importance of the position. The questions is, given the information available, is a separate article necessary.  I, and other editors are not convinced that it is.--RadioFan (talk) 17:29, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment Without music, a circus performance would be dreary. But I question the need for a list of every band director in the history of every notable circus. Similarly, I do not see the need to list every employee who held that position in the main article. There are many types of notable organizations which do not have a complete listing of every functionary of importance equal to the ringmaster. An orchestra conductor is much more likely to have reviews with substantial coverage of how he conducted the orchestra. Likewise a coach of a notable team or a producer of a notable show will have articles about him. Where is such independent coverage of each ringmaster? He seems more like the stadium announcer at a (US) football game. Those who have references, like Dan Costello, should be mentioned in the main article about the circus and perhaps should have their own articles, if there is as much printed about them as Costello. But being in Wikipedia is not an inherent right that comes with the top hat and whistle. Edison (talk) 20:45, 30 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Keep Although I am not opposed to a well-executed merger. This list is not indiscriminate. Miami33139 (talk) 00:26, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Comment If "ringmasters" of the Ringling Brothers Barnum and Bailey Circus are entitled to inherent notability, and a listing of their names is not "indiscriminate information," does that extend to their counterpart ringmasters at the Hoxie Brothers and the Carson Barnes circuses, who to my eye were just as skilled and just as important to the performance? Edison (talk) 04:42, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete This stuff is perfect for RB B&B's website, not wikipedia. I fail to see why should keep this article when there is no notability established for ringmasters of this particular circus Corpx (talk) 05:35, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment I think that the consensus is that this doesn't merit an article on its own. As for whether the ringmaster stuff is mentioned in the article about the circus, that's no concern of mine.  This is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, and the content of an article is based upon what the most recent editor does.  Mandsford (talk) 13:20, 1 July 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.