External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Lindy Hop. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.
- If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
- If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.--InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 08:41, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
What to do about these articles?
Working on Cleanup Listings for Wikiprojects can be an eye-opening experience. One sees poorly done articles that have been barely touched in 12 years. It makes popflock.com resource look bad. It makes everyone look bad. I don't know anything about dance, and I wish people at Wikiproject Dance would help with this. There are many Lindy hop articles on popflock.com Resource:
There are also articles about Whitey's Lindy Hoppers, a section about Lindy hop in Dance improvisation, Lindy exchange, Jazz dancing, Prairie Lindy Exchange, Swing dancing, East Coast Swing. You get the point. Some of these articles are unsourced, some poorly sourced. None of them are worth bragging about. Given the common subject, these articles can be consolidated, merged, and some of them can be deleted. Now I don't want to hear any bullshit about how they are too precious to be deleted. If they were that precious, people would have shown an interest by now and improved them. Turning on the firehose and releasing a flood of information (unorganized, contradictory, poorly sourced, poorly written) does not help readers. Therefore I suggest we take action. Constructive ideas are welcome.
Vmavanti (talk) 18:53, 19 December 2018 (UTC)
- I'd like to suggest a merger of Lindy Hop, History of Lindy Hop, and Lindy hop today and potentially deletion or merger of some other tangential pages like Lindy exchange. It seems to me that discussing the History and Current State of a thing are pretty major purposes of the article about that thing, so I'm not sure why these pages were split off. There appears to be a large lack of references and a troubling tend towards self-promotion in the "Lindy space" (i.e. the various articles relating to the dance and scene) so I think some merging and deletions could be a good start here.
I also think that at the very least, the styles of Lindy such as Hollywood-style Lindy Hop and Savoy-style Lindy Hop should be included as sub-sections of the Lindy Hop article, much the same way that the Ballet article has done with its styles. In the case of at least the former, it doesn't look large enough to warrant its own article, so I'd sub-section it and redirect the link. Jelleecat (talk) 04:57, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for contributing. Those sound like reasonable suggestions.
Vmavanti (talk) 19:00, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
- It's been several years since they've contributed, but there were several others very vocal on this topic, so in case they're still Watching, I'd like to give them a week or so for feedback. If we don't hear back, I'm happy to merge those pages into sections of the main article. I don't know that I have the time to source, which is what is really needed, but I'll see if I can find it. I suggested Prairie Lindy Exchange as a candidate for deletion, as it appears to be just a list of social events. I'd suggest we tackle the others one-by-one. Jelleecat (talk) 19:42, 5 January 2019 (UTC)
@Jelleecat: I've tagged the articles in question that you asked for at WP:PM, let's see if you get more input for your proposals. Richard3120 (talk) 22:09, 15 January 2019 (UTC)
- Awesome, thank you @Richard3120:! It's helpful to see how you tagged them. Is there a consensus around how long to wait before actioning a merge proposal if there doesn't happen to be any discussion? And if merging, am I okay to merge content that isn't properly cited, knowing that I may not be able to find citations? Jelleecat (talk) 02:08, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
- It's usually considered that two or three months is enough time for a discussion to run. I guess there's no problem merging unsoured content - someone can remove it if they can't find sources either. Richard3120 (talk) 02:15, 18 January 2019 (UTC)
- Certainly there are too many articles. After the first 2 mergers below, I think Lindy hop today should be merged into Lindy hop, but the pretty long "history" article left as is. Johnbod (talk) 15:41, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- They are and have been being merged. The Lindy hop today is wholly unsourced and an un-announced 2006 split from the Lindy hop article. I plan to re-merge it to the latter soon -- if there are no objections. Also, the List of lindy hop moves article will be nominated for deletion. GenQuest "Talk to Me" 12:43, 6 April 2019 (UTC)
Merged Hollywood-style Lindy Hop and Savoy-style Lindy Hop into Lindy Hop.
Vmavanti (talk) 19:45, 12 February 2019 (UTC)
Lindy hop today
I would like to see something done about the unsourced Lindy hop today article as soon as possible so I can remove the twelve-year-old template. Yes, twelve. Would anyone like to work on it or suggest what to do? Preferably someone who knows about dance.
Vmavanti (talk) 01:59, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
Merging these pages seems like a good idea, and I'm happy to start working on it (and I am someone who does Lindy hop), but it might take a little while. KBuxton (talk) 05:38, 9 July 2019 (UTC)
- Ye gods, Lindy hop today is awful. I just tossed out a bunch of vague, badly written, original-research synthesis. A whole bunch more could be erased or condensed, which would make it easier to merge the useful bits into Lindy hop. - DavidWBrooks (talk) 20:16, 3 September 2019 (UTC)