242:: At first blush this looks like it might meet notability requirements. The references are good generally, though regional sources such as Western Morning News should only be used for information content and not notability and tweets are discouraged in general. But if you look at the articles in detail it falls apart. The Telegraph is mainly reviewing the music and the performance and commenting on the local boys make good angle. The same article, more or less, would have been written if the concert was in London or Manchester. Similarly for The Guardian's review which also talks about the upcoming tour and album. There have been some notable tours and more notable albums, but for individual concerts you better be talking about
323:. Mostly for the reasons as stated above, the two gigs got a shitload of coverage not only from BBC but general magazines before the project went into fruition. Wiki is supposed to be source for information, and the Teignmouth gigs are one of the big staples of what Muse did for the fan community and for themselves, one of their bigger projects which took quite some time to establish. I don't see any reason as to why articles about tours, especially this one, should be deleted.
382:
I could agree with that but then I'd suggest renaming it to Muse 2009 Tour or something like that. A Seaside
Rendezvous isn't something that could largely be considered a part of The Resistance Tour. Some people like to call it that but it hasn't even kicked off yet, ASR was more of a tribute type of
288:
Definitely keep - I normally don't bother to input on issues like this but when I saw this page was nominated I was both shocked and confused. Muse are an extremely notable band and these two gigs together were a very big deal and covered widely be the media. The references are accurate and many too
304:
As far as notability is concerned, nothing sourced is worth anything. After all, most gigs from notable bands would be covered locally and in music publications and music coverage in newspapers. As mentioned above, the only argument I can see for its notability is the level of coverage given to the
338:
This is not an article about a tour, it's about a single event. If it was about a tour then it probably wouldn't be an issue. My suggestion is to first rename the article to something like "Muse 2009 tour", then refocus it to be about the tour and remove some the extraneous detail about the
211:
That's far from true! It has been covered in the media by many newspapers, magazines, etc., and it is notable in itself anyway. There is quite a lot of information available and it can be expanded further. Check the individual reviews!
305:
gigs by the BBC, and Radio 1 in particular (which includes the documentary due to be broadcast this coming Friday on BBC3). However, I personally do not think that, al coming from one broadcaster, is enough to establish notability.
151:
289:
so what is the problem? It is an article people will want to read and get a lot of use out of - that surely is the main priority in creating an article and it has been covered well.
112:
145:
383:
gig, Muse are still to support U2 before they go off on their own again, which could also be added into a 2009 Tour article along with the VMA Awards gig.
347:. The BBC is a highly regarded source and a few verifiable cites from will go a long way to establish credibility. I'll even give you one to get started:
340:
85:
80:
89:
72:
186:, I don't see that individual gigs are ever considered notable enough for seperate articles. Notable content could easily be merged to
166:
133:
17:
350:. I have nothing against The Muse, but this an encyclopedia, not a blog about the awesome concert someone saw last night.--
127:
392:
377:
359:
332:
314:
298:
277:
259:
221:
203:
54:
411:
294:
123:
76:
36:
410:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a
173:
191:
368:. Which I also nominated for deletion, but depending on how both discussions go it may be worth a merge.
348:
290:
68:
60:
365:
239:
159:
49:
384:
324:
139:
243:
217:
388:
328:
29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
355:
273:
255:
373:
310:
199:
183:
213:
106:
343:
as a pattern. Most importantly, if it's getting so much coverage on the BBC then
351:
269:
251:
187:
369:
306:
195:
268:
Changing to Merge having learned of the existence of the second article.--
194:
if deemed necessary. Only been covered in any exceptional way by the BBC.
247:
48:, without prejudice against a merge should local consensus so decide.
404:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
339:
individual concert. Use an established tour article like
102:
98:
94:
158:
39:). No further edits should be made to this page.
414:). No further edits should be made to this page.
172:
8:
364:In which there is already an article on
341:Rolling Stones Tour of the Americas '75
7:
24:
18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion
393:15:54, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
378:08:47, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
360:21:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
345:put links to it in the article
333:10:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
278:11:45, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
55:00:51, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
1:
315:17:42, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
299:15:52, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
260:01:46, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
222:20:52, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
204:19:37, 8 September 2009 (UTC)
431:
407:Please do not modify it.
32:Please do not modify it.
192:The Resistance (album)
69:A Seaside Rendezvous
61:A Seaside Rendezvous
366:The Resistance Tour
240:The Resistance Tour
44:The result was
422:
409:
177:
176:
162:
110:
92:
52:
34:
430:
429:
425:
424:
423:
421:
420:
419:
418:
412:deletion review
405:
291:Officially Mr X
119:
83:
67:
64:
50:
37:deletion review
30:
22:
21:
20:
12:
11:
5:
428:
426:
417:
416:
400:
399:
398:
397:
396:
395:
318:
317:
283:
282:
281:
280:
263:
262:
227:
226:
225:
224:
180:
179:
116:
63:
58:
42:
41:
25:
23:
15:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
427:
415:
413:
408:
402:
401:
394:
390:
386:
381:
380:
379:
375:
371:
367:
363:
362:
361:
357:
353:
349:
346:
342:
337:
336:
335:
334:
330:
326:
322:
316:
312:
308:
303:
302:
301:
300:
296:
292:
287:
279:
275:
271:
267:
266:
265:
264:
261:
257:
253:
249:
245:
241:
237:
234:
233:
229:
228:
223:
219:
215:
210:
209:
208:
207:
206:
205:
201:
197:
193:
189:
185:
175:
171:
168:
165:
161:
157:
153:
150:
147:
144:
141:
138:
135:
132:
129:
125:
122:
121:Find sources:
117:
114:
108:
104:
100:
96:
91:
87:
82:
78:
74:
70:
66:
65:
62:
59:
57:
56:
53:
47:
40:
38:
33:
27:
26:
19:
406:
403:
344:
320:
319:
285:
284:
235:
231:
230:
181:
169:
163:
155:
148:
142:
136:
130:
120:
45:
43:
31:
28:
188:Muse (band)
146:free images
51:Skomorokh
244:Woodstock
248:Live Aid
214:Andre666
184:WP:MUSIC
113:View log
385:Carbo45
325:Carbo45
152:WP refs
140:scholar
86:protect
81:history
352:RDBury
270:RDBury
252:RDBury
232:Delete
124:Google
90:delete
370:U-Mos
307:U-Mos
238:with
236:Merge
196:U-Mos
167:JSTOR
128:books
107:views
99:watch
95:links
16:<
389:talk
374:talk
356:talk
329:talk
321:Keep
311:talk
295:talk
286:Keep
274:talk
256:talk
218:talk
200:talk
182:Per
160:FENS
134:news
103:logs
77:talk
73:edit
46:keep
250:.--
246:or
190:or
174:TWL
111:– (
391:)
376:)
358:)
331:)
313:)
297:)
276:)
258:)
220:)
202:)
154:)
105:|
101:|
97:|
93:|
88:|
84:|
79:|
75:|
387:(
372:(
354:(
327:(
309:(
293:(
272:(
254:(
216:(
198:(
178:)
170:·
164:·
156:·
149:·
143:·
137:·
131:·
126:(
118:(
115:)
109:)
71:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.