Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Philippine presidential trivia

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.

The result was Delete—The preceding

List of Philippine presidential trivia

List of Philippine presidential trivia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

Delete - the title pretty much says it all. Trivia. Random collection of indiscriminate facts cobbled together for no clear purpose. Otto4711 07:42, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge potentially interesting/useful information (e.g., length of term, longevity, etc., but not births) into individual presidential articles (perhaps a "Trivia" section for each), then delete. Although I think the article should go per
  WP:NOT#IINFO, the information it contains is very well-referenced and some of it is relevant to the individual biographical articles. Black Falcon 08:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete No need for a trivia article.Realkyhick 09:28, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment How about
  Frequently Asked Questions, Travel guides, Memorials, Instruction manuals, Internet guides, Textbooks and annotated texts, Plot summaries, Lyrics databases or maybe Things made up in school one day? Which is which? Kevin Ray 09:33, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• WP:INN Shrumster 11:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• If other crap exists, feel free to take it here. Oh, yes,
  trivia sections are to be avoided. MER-C 11:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Note that the items listed at
  WP:NOT#IINFO are the things for which consensus has been clearly established. That does not mean that those are the only possible types of indiscriminate information. Otto4711 17:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Delete -
  trivia sections are to be avoided. This is just an bloated trivia section. MER-C 11:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete or merge - the more interesting content could be merged to
  WP:NOT an indiscriminate collection of information. Walton monarchist89 11:53, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete as per the suggestion in the title - TRIVIA - this isn't a "Hello" magazine --Euzebia Zuk 14:56, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak delete. It recreates information already in other articles and does violate
  WP:NOT as constituted. Note that merge is not necessary because there are already tons of lists with length of term, longetivity, etc. in the Philippine presidential lists category. Some of these are separately being nominated for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Philippine Presidents by middle name, however, so that should be taken into account. Note that this is not meant to solicit votes for the other AfD. Dekimasuが... 05:20, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Weak delete - trivial --John Krugger 11:03, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment - Try to compare what is the difference between the United States Presidential trivia article and the List of Philippine presidential trivia. Why should the Philippine article be deleted while the American should not? Try to review the arguments in the Afd of the American article: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States Presidential trivia. Do I smell something fishy here? Why was the United States Presidential trivia keeped? Huh? - Kevin Ray 13:04, 3 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That article is up for deletion as well, please see

Jerry lavoie 03:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply

]

• Note: This debate has been included in the
  SkierRMH 03:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• delete per nom.
  Jerry lavoie 03:11, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep, obvious subarticle, splendidly referenced. If we have trivia articles at all they should look mostly like this. --Dhartung | Talk 05:32, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per reasonings outlined in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/United States Presidential trivia. --Chris S. 08:33, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Neutral There is so much AFDs concerning Presidents of the Philippines that it isn't funny anymore. per
  WP:TRIV. All encyclopedic info that can be salvaged can then be incorporated to the respective presidential articles. I hope, in Wikipedia, we edit as equals. —Lenticel 09:29, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep, valid subarticle, too long to merge into main article, sourced, not just about a particular president, etc. (edit:) Indeed, this is not all simply trivia, much of it is not just interesting but in fact notable. —siroχo 10:15, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak keep Trivia lists are acceptable in rare cases, see Lists of trivia.--T. Anthony 12:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Hey, thanks for linking that article, now I see where my next round of AfDs are coming from! Otto4711 18:21, 4 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or merge, some of these appear to be in their own respective articles already; the home provinces are in the President of the Philippines article and on each article about a particular president; some are just downright silly, an example: "Three Presidents were born with a different name" Estrada's is a stage name, and the women presidents married so they changed their name, another one is "Only one president was born and died in the month of his birth", I mean, so what? --Howard the Duck 07:03, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. If this survives AfD, I suggest heavy editing to remove redundancy with related lists (Philippine presidents by date of birth, Philippine presidents by date of death, etc.). Dekimasuが... 11:11, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As Howard the Duck says, there is some downright silly stuff here. It just doesn't make the notability grade. The significance of three presidents being born in March is what exactly? --
  Folantin 11:54, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete - truly
  Deletion! 16:19, 5 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Merge content to various articles, as much of it is very well sourced. --- RockMFR 23:18, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete To me, "trivia" is the antithesis of encyclopedic. If the information were worth including, it would be part of the articles of the individuals who held this office. Merge whatever is pertinent and delete this article. Agent 86 00:14, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Trivia is not encyclopaedic; it is trivial. If any of the information is worth including, it should be included in one of the parent topics. GassyGuy 08:54, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep But trim slightly. No good merge target. Some of the information is truly trivial and should be cut but some (like home provinces and the like) should be kept in a central article and this is a good way, IMO, to keep President of the Philippines from becoming bloated. Eluchil404 09:11, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - articles should be about something more than just trivia.
  Addhoc 10:59, 8 February 2007 (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.