Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Why Pink Floyd...? (2nd nomination)


 * 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 redirect to Pink Floyd. Viable ATD. None of the keeps are policy based. Star  Mississippi  14:29, 25 February 2023 (UTC)

Why Pink Floyd...?
AfDs for this article:


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

WP:NOPAGE: This was marketing campaigning for a series of Pink Floyd album reissues. The campaign itself does not seem independently notable on its own terms and the reissues for each album, where notable, can be sufficiently covered in each individual album article. The reissue campaign was covered in a few reliable sources, such as the Guardian, but there simply doesn't seem to be that much to write about, not enough to justify an entire page.

WP:NOTCATALOG: The article mainly comprises a series of track lists. Popcornfud (talk) 15:45, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Music and England.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 15:47, 18 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep: this was already discussed previously. I am staunchly against removing information. If it can be improved upon, then let's do that. But deleting information is not helpful. Jmj713 (talk) 17:51, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Actually, deleting information is often extremely helpful, as many types of information are out of scope or inappropriate for Wikipedia. See the policies WP:INDISCRIMINATE, WP:NOTACATALOG and WP:NOTTEXTBOOK. Popcornfud (talk) 18:01, 18 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes and I very much disagree with those policies. Jmj713 (talk) 22:19, 18 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Keep: it wasn't deleted the first time around - has the quality of the article declined since then? If it wasn't deleted then, why now? Moreover, any attempts in the past to include the information in this article in the articles for individual albums has been reverted by people who believe information on reissues and box sets to be unsuitable for the albums' articles. – Dyolf87 (talk) 16:34, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * it wasn't deleted the first time around - has the quality of the article declined since then?
 * Yes. The article has deteriorated into an extensive series of track lists in violation of the policies WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:NOTCATALOG, and attracted no further content to justify its existence per WP:NOPAGE.
 * If it wasn't deleted then, why now?
 * The previous nomination was more than a decade ago. Standards change, as do opinions, and editors. Popcornfud (talk) 16:47, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * The article has always been track lists... it has barely changed in a decade. – Dyolf87 (talk) 09:36, 26 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Comment - Is there any reasonable hope/potential for expanding this at all? As is, this feel mores like a halfway point between a Discogs entry and a promotional campaign from the band more than an entry in a encyclopedia. I don't know if it needs to be entirely erased from Wikipedia, but more of a very selective merge to the respective band and discography articles? Sergecross73   msg me  17:25, 24 February 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, this is essentially what I'm proposing. We can summarise the contents of each reissue on each album page — for example, see The_Dark_Side_of_the_Moon. We wouldn't include the extensive tracklists as we have a policy against that, WP:ALTTRACKLIST. Popcornfud (talk) 17:39, 24 February 2023 (UTC)


 * Redirect to Pink Floyd per nomination. The coverage is minimal and I don't see much for a notability pass here. The two Billboard articles are quote-heavy and probably based almost entirely on a press release, and the NewsRoomAmerica article (a dead link, this is an archive) is definitely that. I doubt the other sources' reliability. Given the popularity of this band, I would assume this is all already covered in the album articles. If not then merge whatever's good to those. QuietHere (talk) 17:31, 24 February 2023 (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.