Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unicorns N' Rainbows Tour


 * 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, any merger proposal can be discussed in the usual way. (NAC) RMHED   19:28, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Unicorns N' Rainbows Tour
AfDs for this article: 
 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Article fails to establish notability as per WP:GNG. Fails WP:MUSIC. There is nothing inherently notable about a concert tour. Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate list of information - that includes long lists of tour dates that belong on fan sites and not an encyclopedia. Nouse4aname (talk) 09:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)  Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:59, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Music-related deletion discussions.  -- Ron Ritzman (talk) 23:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep Read the article. It's slightly unusual perhaps, but it certainly seems encyclopedic.--Firefly322 (talk) 08:41, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * "Read the article." is not a counterargument to an assertion that there are no sources to satisfy the Primary Notability Criterion. A valid counterargument, that actually would hold water and rebut the nominatino, would be citations of such sources.  There are none in the article, and you've provided none here at AFD.  Sources! Sources! Sources! Uncle G (talk) 13:47, 8 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment It's really the nominator's responsibility to follow WP:BEFORE and not the !voters. Sigh. There are plenty of reliable sources available and a good faith effort (e.g., a simple find tag like the one I have just placed on its talk page) would have revealed them. See these Google news search results. --Firefly322 (talk) 19:40, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  14:53, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Weak Keep - I think Limp Bizkit is notable enough that a major tour deserves an article. It does need sources though. Peter Ballard (talk) 00:55, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep The tour got some media coverage, and is a notable event since it involves a rather large number of people. How many people went to every concert?  If an event involves hundreds of thousands of people, even if spread out over time and at a different locations, then surely its notable.   D r e a m Focus  10:39, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Most of the sources referred to in the link above are "PRNewswire" or press releases. Others are trivial mentions. Fails WP:GNG. Tim Song (talk) 21:51, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge into Limp Bizkit. A concert tour by itself is not notable.-- LAA Fan '' 04:50, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.


 * Keep On the basis on continual relisting. If consensus cannot be reached after SEVEN DAYS then it should default to keep.  Lugnuts  (talk) 16:46, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Another approach, one that may be profitable, would be if the editors in favor of keeping the article articulated a reason backed by our inclusion polices or guidelines rather than assuming that their superior numbers will result in a keep. Closers don't (or shouldn't) just count noses. Xymmax So let it be written   So let it be done  19:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Merge/redirect to Limp Bizkit due to the lack of multiple reliable sources. The only in-depth reliable source in the article that discusses this tour is this article from Las Vegas Sun; furthermore, that article covers a local event (The title is: Limp Bizkit plans free concert July 18 in Las Vegas). This tour is not notable and there is not enough coverage to warrant a separate article, so a section in the band's article is sufficient. Cunard (talk) 19:21, 16 October 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.