Talk:Gong (band)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the Project's quality scale. [FAQ] (If you rated the article, please give a short summary at comments to explain the ratings and/or to identify the strengths and weaknesses.)
	This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to musicians and musical groups on Wikipedia.

An appropriate infobox may need to be added to this article, or the current infobox may need to be updated. Please refer to the list of biography infoboxes for further information.

I noticed Gilli Smyth didn't have a wikipage. I've created a small stub atricle, contributions welcome. --Salix alba (talk) 18:11, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Merger of Gong mythology into Gong (band)

I suggest this. Any objections?--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 15:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Why would such a move be advisable? I don't actually see what the benefits would be, but perhaps you could explain. -- Antaeus Feldspar 16:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

It's completely unreferenced, and many Wikipedia editors would not agree that it merits its own article - they would call it fancruft of a sort. A third opinion might be nice.--h i s s p a c e r e s e a r c h 20:15, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, "completely unreferenced" is a reason to start referencing (starting with information from the official website would be a good idea), rather than a reason to merge. As for whether many Wikipedia editors would call it fancruft, doubtless many would -- but many Wikipedia editors make such decisions poorly, so it behooves us to make our decisions logically, rather than defer to the (hypothesized) judgment of other editors who might not be looking at the issue closely. So, let's look at this situation. Gong is a band (actually, a whole family of related bands) which has been recording and touring and maintaining an audience for about four decades. Somehow I don't think it qualifies as excessive for them to have two articles rather than one. In this case, since the meat of each article exists in a totally separate plane (the facts about the real people in the band(s) vs. the fictional mythology told over several albums) I think it makes more sense to keep them separate, as they are. -- Antaeus Feldspar 04:08, 19 March 2007 (UTC)