528:. This was a major tour by a major popular artist. Spears's tours, including this one, have been key to the development of her image at different stages of her career. Yes, the article needs to be improved, to describe more of the artistic aspects of the show, and the commercial results of the tour, and reviews that the show got. But it is definitely notable and AfD is not a suitable venue for it.
171:
On first sight it seems neither better nor worse than other 'xxx Tour' articles - both for this and other artists - (and to be honest, there's not much else you can write about a concert tour unless it turns into a Spinal Tap-esque fiasco, is there). It is unsourced (but again that's hardly
193:
does not mean it should stay. Likewise, just becuase it is a tour article doesn't mean that it's okay for it to be unsourced. I think that you're getting to the heart of the problem with most tour articles, and to that point I agree with you very much.
358:
tour notable. The fact that it is her first tour is not inherently notable. By that logic, just about any notable artist's first tour would be notable, which they are not. Likewise, the fact that it was in support of her first album, as
77:
452:
There are news sources that mention this tour (quite a few actually). And there had to have been reviews of this. Seriously. Maybe paper-only, but there is no way this didn't get reviews in local papers.
399:
72:
137:
104:
99:
108:
91:
559:
537:
514:
496:
462:
444:
414:
381:
345:
311:
273:
244:
212:
181:
162:
56:
224:. I agree with MadScot, there isn't much to write about a tour unless something Spinal Tap-esque happens. Which is why it is so hard to find any
505:
No? Reviews are great sources for things like this. Not sure how an article in a newspaper on a topic can be trivial coverage of that topic.
17:
542:
Can you support your arguments by citing reliable, independent third party sources which provide non-trivial coverage of this tour?
95:
488:
373:
303:
204:
154:
576:
36:
87:
62:
360:
290:
575:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
551:
436:
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
261:
232:. I'm voting for delete rather than redirect because I feel the article name is a non-plausible search term.
533:
190:
260:
as the first tour of a obviously notable singer. No offence... but your Delete argument sounds more like
478:
coverage. There's no question that it was written about, but generally reviews are considered trivial.
544:
429:
410:
529:
485:
370:
341:
300:
269:
201:
177:
151:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
229:
510:
458:
225:
406:
329:
234:
321:
286:
282:
257:
253:
354:
But the reasons your giving are all other notable things that don't inherently make
479:
364:
337:
294:
265:
195:
173:
145:
50:
125:
506:
454:
427:. Sites like "britneyspears.org" and press releases are obviously not such.
144:
Just a tour, isn't really much more than a setlist and list of tour dates.
289:. Likewise, your argument that the artist is notable doesn't apply, since
293:. The tour ITSELF has to be notable, not just the artist on the tour.
78:
Articles for deletion/...Baby One More Time Tour (2nd nomination)
569:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
361:
the notability of that album cannot be transferred to this tour
228:
to establish any sort of notability. Article fails to meet
400:
list of Bands and musicians-related deletion discussions
132:
121:
117:
113:
423:due to a lack of non-trivial coverage by reliable
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
579:). No further edits should be made to this page.
73:Articles for deletion/...Baby One More Time Tour
8:
172:exceptional for tour articles it seems).
398:: This debate has been included in the
332:and the performed songs were from her "
70:
18:Knowledge (XXG):Articles for deletion
7:
69:
252:The article is about an obviously
24:
326:Spears' first solo national tour
1:
560:18:06, 23 October 2008 (UTC)
538:19:18, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
515:12:44, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
497:01:27, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
463:01:13, 22 October 2008 (UTC)
445:21:24, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
415:19:37, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
382:20:32, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
346:19:14, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
312:18:40, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
274:18:12, 21 October 2008 (UTC)
256:concert tour. The Tour was
245:12:30, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
213:03:15, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
182:03:10, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
163:03:01, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
57:01:27, 24 October 2008 (UTC)
291:notability is not inherited
596:
88:...Baby One More Time Tour
63:...Baby One More Time Tour
285:is not the same thing as
572:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
474:- But the question is
68:AfDs for this article:
425:third party sources
189:- But just because
191:other stuff exists
44:The result was
417:
403:
320:I believe it was
243:
587:
574:
558:
554:
547:
482:
443:
439:
432:
404:
394:
367:
328:", Sponsored by
297:
241:
240:
233:
198:
148:
135:
129:
111:
53:
34:
595:
594:
590:
589:
588:
586:
585:
584:
583:
577:deletion review
570:
557:
552:
545:
543:
493:
480:
442:
437:
430:
428:
378:
365:
308:
295:
238:Esradekan Gibb
236:
235:
209:
196:
159:
146:
131:
102:
86:
83:
66:
51:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
593:
591:
582:
581:
565:
564:
563:
562:
549:
546:coccyx bloccyx
522:
521:
520:
519:
518:
517:
500:
499:
489:
466:
465:
447:
434:
431:coccyx bloccyx
418:
391:
390:
389:
388:
387:
386:
385:
384:
374:
349:
348:
330:Tommy Hilfiger
315:
314:
304:
277:
276:
262:WP:IDONTLIKEIT
247:
218:
217:
216:
215:
205:
155:
142:
141:
82:
81:
80:
75:
67:
65:
60:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
592:
580:
578:
573:
567:
566:
561:
556:
555:
548:
541:
540:
539:
535:
531:
530:Wasted Time R
527:
524:
523:
516:
512:
508:
504:
503:
502:
501:
498:
494:
492:
486:
483:
477:
473:
470:
469:
468:
467:
464:
460:
456:
451:
448:
446:
441:
440:
433:
426:
422:
419:
416:
412:
408:
401:
397:
393:
392:
383:
379:
377:
371:
368:
362:
357:
353:
352:
351:
350:
347:
343:
339:
335:
331:
327:
323:
319:
318:
317:
316:
313:
309:
307:
301:
298:
292:
288:
284:
281:
280:
279:
278:
275:
271:
267:
263:
259:
255:
251:
248:
246:
242:
239:
231:
227:
223:
220:
219:
214:
210:
208:
202:
199:
192:
188:
185:
184:
183:
179:
175:
170:
167:
166:
165:
164:
160:
158:
152:
149:
139:
134:
127:
123:
119:
115:
110:
106:
101:
97:
93:
89:
85:
84:
79:
76:
74:
71:
64:
61:
59:
58:
55:
54:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
571:
568:
550:
525:
490:
475:
471:
449:
435:
424:
420:
395:
375:
355:
333:
325:
305:
249:
237:
221:
206:
186:
168:
156:
143:
49:
46:no consensus
45:
43:
31:
28:
526:Strong keep
476:non-trivial
334:debut album
283:Verifiable
407:raven1977
553:(toccyx)
438:(toccyx)
254:verified
138:View log
491:Contrib
481:Rwiggum
472:Comment
376:Contrib
366:Rwiggum
338:Pmedema
322:notable
306:Contrib
296:Rwiggum
287:notable
266:Pmedema
258:notable
207:Contrib
197:Rwiggum
187:Comment
174:MadScot
169:comment
157:Contrib
147:Rwiggum
105:protect
100:history
52:MBisanz
421:Delete
336:". --
230:WP:GNG
222:Delete
133:delete
109:delete
507:Hobit
455:Hobit
226:WP:RS
136:) – (
126:views
118:watch
114:links
16:<
534:talk
511:talk
459:talk
450:Keep
411:talk
396:Note
356:this
342:talk
324:as "
270:talk
250:Keep
178:talk
122:logs
96:talk
92:edit
405:--
402:.
264:.--
536:)
513:)
495:)
461:)
413:)
380:)
363:.
344:)
310:)
272:)
211:)
180:)
161:)
124:|
120:|
116:|
112:|
107:|
103:|
98:|
94:|
48:.
532:(
509:(
487:/
484:(
457:(
409:(
372:/
369:(
340:(
302:/
299:(
268:(
203:/
200:(
176:(
153:/
150:(
140:)
130:(
128:)
90:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.