Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1993 Phish Tour

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 of the debate was no consensus. Ichiro (会話|+|投稿記録|メール) 01:10, 25 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] 1993 Phish Tour

Unencyclopedic fancruft. Daniel Case 06:46, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Delete per nom. Arbustoo 09:33, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep Phish is the successor to the Dead, and about all they do is tour --Ruby 14:22, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Delete per nom. BrianGCrawfordMA 15:39, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

  • Keep. If TV shows have articles devoted to each of their episodes, I don't see why eminently notable bands can't have well-documented articles devoted to each of their tours, especially bands whose live performances are the center of their art. Monicasdude 16:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
This article is about more than the tour. It gives a setlist for every single show. I don't think we do that for the Dead. I'm open to articles about the tours per se, but not in this level of detail. That's what fan sites are for. Daniel Case 19:32, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
Update: There is Grateful Dead concerts of 1995, which I think speaks for itself as to the notability of this sort of thing from the choice of year. Daniel Case 19:35, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Delete: Per nom. Sure, Phish is great but an article about every year's tour?! Why not go further and have a separate article for every single show? Or another level and describe the "art" employed for each song at each show for each year's tour? Sheesh... Are we trying to become a cure for insomnia? —Wknight94 (talk) 17:28, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
comment:Actually I think that would be verry interesting. In classical music formation we get the chance to analyse the different genre, style and manerism of compositions via different composers. If there was an article on "Love me tender" I would expect there to be an analisys of the variants that the original singer had. If possible compare it with other notable group that may have sung the song. --CyclePat 21:08, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep, although I guess if somebody feels extremely strongly about this then a merge would be okay as well. Major tour by a legendary group approaching its height of its popularity at the time. Andrew Lenahan - Starblind 18:09, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Comment Before I say keep or delete I want to know why only this tour? What about 1983-85 Phish Tour, 1986 Phish Tour, 1987 Phish Tour,1988 Phish Tour, 1989 Phish Tour, 1990 Phish Tour, 1991 Phish Tour & 1992 Phish Tour? Was 1993 a bad touring year for Phish?CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 18:29, 19 February 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. We'll see if they're deletion-worthy too. Daniel Case 19:30, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Keep — per Ruby/Endomion — If all they do is tour, then perhaps you could create an article for each tour, and then link them all under the category [[Category:Phish Concerts]]. Kareeser|Talk! 18:37, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
  • Comment: I guess my question is why? These articles just look like various lists of Phish songs over and over and over. It's just being copied from some book. Seems like overkill to me. Why not list every concert The Eagles ever did? Or The Go Go's? Or Cannibal Corpse? —Wknight94 (talk) 20:01, 19 February 2006 (UTC)
  • keep However, I think it is important to make sure the sources are proper and that it is easy for people to get further information. This article is lacking this. Though a reference section is provided, it is awfully small for such a big article. In my opinion we should follow WP:CITE. pick one format? If you find news pappers that would help to. But assided from that I don't understand why we should delete as per the nomination. Unless you where thinking this should be put into wikisource? --CyclePat 21:03, 19 February 2006 (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.