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.
Per
WP:NLIST it says "Notability of lists (whether titled as "List of Xs" or "Xs") is based on the group. One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources" This article does not discuss Aguilera as a touring artist and is instead simply a summation or summary of her tours with content copied from other articles. It is not notable because as a topic it has not received
WP:SIGCOV as a group of tours. ≫
Lil-Unique1-{
Talk }- 21:21, 6 June 2022 (UTC)reply
And like I said
WP:OTHERSTUFF isn't a valid argument. Each article should be judged as its own standards.
WP:NLIST clearly says the subject should receive coverage as a group/list of items. If it was about navigation, there is already a category (which is primarily what categories are for), there is also a valid list at
Christina_Aguilera#Tours_and_residencies which provides navigation and swift viewing of the articles. The navigation box at each concert page allows them to be easily navigated. The Beatles have significantly more tour dates and concerts, one of Xtina's is about to be
hammered because it's not even a legit tour. Average page views aren't supposed to be used as comparators or indicators of notability but you're not even comparing like for like. Since you're interested in comparisons, average page views for this article sit at
27/day versus
220/day for Taylor Swift Performances,
150/day for the Beatles, and
7/day for Charlie XCX. Given the low number of page views compared to each of these artists pages and the lack of coverage as a group/list of topics, its more likely that loopholes in
WP:NLIST are used by fans of said artists to create the articles in a fancrufty way. Its interesting that when you were challenged on navigation, and the pre-existence of the information elsewhere, and guidance at
WP:GNG and
WP:NLIST, you fell back on
WP:OTHERSTUFF and
WP:VOTE - the number of people wanting to keep such articles does not add weight to a deletion discussion. It does depend on the justification given. ≫
Lil-Unique1-{
Talk }- 19:37, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Dream Focus: have you read
WP:NLIST? The topic of the group of items a.k.a tours by the artist needs to have received coverage as a topic. That means that tours by the artist need to be mentioned in reliable sources as a whole, not just summation of individual concerts amalgamated together. Also lists aren't for navigation, categories are. ≫
Lil-Unique1-{
Talk }- 08:11, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Did you read the second paragraph or just the first? There is no present consensus for how to assess the notability of more complex and cross-categorization lists (such as "Lists of X of Y") or what other criteria may justify the notability of stand-alone lists and Lists that fulfill recognized informational, navigation, or development purposes often are kept regardless of any demonstrated notability. I've been participating in AFDs for lists for many years now, things like this are kept over 90% of the time.
DreamFocus 13:47, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Three points: 1) your opening comment does not
assume good faith, it comes across as snarky. 2) Its not not a complex, or cross-categorization ist. 3) As the user below pointed out, there's already a tours and residency list for XTina. Furthermore
WP:OTHERSTUFF isn't a valid argument for why stuff exists. There are plenty of examples where experienced users have been wrongly applying and implementing policies or haven't been aware that consensus changes over time.
WP:SALAT says "When entries in a category have grown enough to warrant a fresh list-article" - there aren't enough entries to warrant a list, especially not when there's already another residency and tour page. Everyone who argues to keep lists of tours never addresses the fact that they serve as a summary of each individual tour and navigation is primarily served by categories. Secondary navigation is provided by the list on the artist's own page. This is, once again, duplication or tripplication. ≫
Lil-Unique1-{
Talk }- 14:34, 7 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep as a valid
WP:SPLIT and
WP:SPINOUT from the main article. Per
WP:SIZERULE, articles over 100 kb "should almost certainly be divided". The main Christina Aguilera article presently consists of over 219 kb of data. Despite this, merging back to the article would be a much better alternative compared to deletion, because the content of the list serves to improve coverage of the subject on Wikipedia. Outright deletion would make the encyclopedia less comprehensive and informative about the subject. North America1000 14:11, 8 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Size and split are not under contention here. It's more that there isn't coverage of a group topic and this article is basically a summary/synthesis of the individual tour pages. ≫
Lil-Unique1-{
Talk }- 21:56, 12 June 2022 (UTC)reply
Keep. Seven major tours and a successful Vegas residency are enough to keep the article. There's valid information and there are reliable sources provided. It's all perfectly valid, there's notability, there are more than enough sources and links provided. There's absolutely no need to delete the article.
AngelOfDestiny (
talk) 22:53, 9 June 2022 (UTC)reply
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.