Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ringo (band)


 * 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 delete per consensus on article removal and discussant concerns that the redirect could create confusion. Doczilla @SUPERHEROLOGIST 23:59, 2 January 2022 (UTC)

Ringo (band)

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Fails WP:BAND; I can find no significant coverage of this band or any other indication of notability. I suggest redirecting to Tim Keegan, its only notable member. Lennart97 (talk) 15:06, 3 December 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 06:22, 11 December 2021 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, 🌀 Locomotive207 - talk  🌀  03:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC) Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Daniel (talk) 12:29, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions. Lennart97 (talk) 15:06, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. Lennart97 (talk) 15:06, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Comment if the nominator is suggesting a redirect, why is this at articles for deletion? This should have been handled with a merge proposal, because clearly making a redlink here is not the right way to handle this. Chubbles (talk) 23:14, 3 December 2021 (UTC)
 * I am not proposing to merge, because there is nothing to merge. I am also clearly not proposing to create a redlink. I am proposing to blank and redirect, which is essentially a form of deletion and for which AfD is the appropriate venue as confirmed by this RFC. I hope that clears things up for you. Lennart97 (talk) 14:39, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Well, I would have been in the minority vote in that RfC, but there it is in black and white. Chubbles (talk) 15:12, 4 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Delete - Admins can consider the above argument about redirecting as an alternative to deletion, but I recommend against redirecting because we would end up with a confusing situation in light of the much more famous Ringo out there. As for this band, there is nothing to say about them except for how they changed their name due to (ironically) confusion with someone else, and that is something that nobody ever reported on. I can find no reviews of their solitary album either. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 15:54, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * That Ringo never started a band under that exact name, and even if he had, responsible knowledge organization would require suitable disambiguation (as with, e.g., blues guitarist Robert Johnson). The redirect could well be to Ringo (disambiguation) instead, perhaps better than a direct redirect. Chubbles (talk) 16:02, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * This is becoming unnecessarily bureaucratic. A redirect procedure of that nature assumes that anyone would ever search for "Ringo (band)". And even if someone does, I see no benefit in having that person land at a disambig page that features an unlinked (no blue or red) entry that says "an English alternative rock band" because there is literally nothing else to say about that band. And redirecting to the band's one member causes unnecessary confusion with the famous Ringo (as I already noted). This could have been a fairly easy discussion about deleting an unknown band, but now admins get to figure out arcane redirect procedures. Whatever happens, get rid of this band in one way or another. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 16:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 * We need to get from someone searching "Ringo", interested in the band, to Tim Keegan. That is a niche search, but it is a search we should support, since we have an article on Keegan, and Keegan released music as the frontman of that band. So that means Keegan should be mentioned on the Ringo disambiguation page. If "Ringo (band)" isn't going to link directly to Keegan, it should link to where people can find things called Ringo that are music-related. That's not bureaucratic; it's scrupulous. Chubbles (talk) 23:28, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * Comment - And now we have yet another relisting that may doom this AfD to "no consensus" purgatory, due to nothing but bureaucracy. Do something, anything, with this article other than allowing it to survive, because the band is not even close to notable. ---  DOOMSDAYER 520 (TALK&#124;CONTRIBS) 15:44, 29 December 2021 (UTC)
 * It seems like you and I are the only ones who care about this subject, and I'm willing to commit to completing the merge and setting redirect/piping targets. Chubbles (talk) 21:53, 29 December 2021 (UTC)


 * Delete or if you must Redirect but get rid, obviously; we simply don't need articles like this, least of all when they have been marked as unsourced for 11 years. RobinCarmody (talk) 02:41, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * Why is it obvious that we should get rid of information relating to Tim Keegan? This whole conversation seems to have been predicated on the presumption that he's not notable enough to merit mention, as well. Chubbles (talk) 17:53, 30 December 2021 (UTC)
 * For what it's worth, as the nominator, I stand by my suggestion to redirect to Tim Keegan. The band and their album are mentioned there and I don't think any confusion with Ringo Starr is likely to occur. Lennart97 (talk) 21:41, 30 December 2021 (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.