This page is an archive. Do not edit the contents of this page. Please direct any additional comments to the current main page.
About this page
This page is for proposals about how to deal with the fork article History of the Beatles and other peripheral articles about the history of the Beatles and how/whether to merge them back into the main article, The Beatles. It also addresses issues of cruft and unsourced detail in all articles about the general history of The Beatles but in particular the main article.
Detailed discussion should be taken to the talk page.
Proposals
"First step" proposal from kingboyk for merging the "History" article and section
1) Remove cruft and rubbish from the History section in this article 2) Salvage anything usable from History of the Beatles and merge it here (or into a sandbox article). 3a) If the resulting History section is too long, move the new version back out to History of the Beatles and leave a brief summary here OR 3b) Replace History of the Beatles with a redirect. --kingboyk21:09, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Perhaps it should be considered editing the main article as a history with an introduction - using subheadings to signpost the more important developments and events - and link to every other relevant article? LessHeard vanU21:14, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
Overviews with liberal usage of {{main}} would be a good idea if we can't squeeze everything into one new article. That's really the intention behind the History of the Beatles fork I think, except that in this case it's failed spectacularly. (On a related note, I would actually like to see some new articles on the Beatles tours). --kingboyk22:42, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
I agree with LessHeard vanU. If the main page was an index page (book-form) with a short paragraph explaining the content, it would make it simpler, and easier to access. andreasegde10:09, 7 July 2006 (UTC)
Articles which might need to be merged into one or two high quality articles on The Beatles and their history
List all articles which are about the general history of The Beatles here. By removing duplicate material and radically refactoring the flagship article we might able to take some of these unloved articles into say two really high quality, featured candidate articles.
I decided to be bold and nail this issue, on 2 November2006. History of the Beatles was 47k, the History section of The Beatles was 30k. At current standards, The Beatles can stand being another 15k or so bigger. The fork has not worked and it was time to get rid of it.
