Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of motorcycle clubs
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
- 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 Keep. --Luigi30 (Taλk) 18:44, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
List of motorcycle clubs
- List of motorcycle clubs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)
Delete for
WP:NOT a collection of information or link farm. The article has been edited 20 times total since May 2006 and it's been nothing but a link/spam farm the whole way. Not needed, deleteable. Thanks... - Denny 17:58, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply
]
- Note: This debate has been included in the SkierRMH 21:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete - unnecessary list per Vivat Regina! 18:06, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- FYI, WP:LIST makes few recommendations one way or another about when to delete lists. Almost the entire guideline seems to be about how to properly format and edit lists, not when they should be removed. The only possible criteria mentioned for deletion in that guideline that I saw was that the information on the list should be verifiable per WP:V. So whether or not a list is "necessary" isn't talked about in that guideline. Dugwiki 18:19, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Keep to correspond to Category:Motorcycle clubs This appears to be a list that provides some additional information related to Category:Motorcycle clubs. Note that the Motorcycle Clubs category appears to be a legitimate subcategory of Category:Motorcyclists organizations, and this list is a way to give additional side information about the articles (since categories only provide the name of the article and nothing else). As a rule of thumb, if something makes for an acceptable category it also makes for an acceptable list. Dugwiki 18:13, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Doesn't that only apply to lists of articles? This is just a list of external links, and thats all it's ever been. - Denny 18:18, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, like all articles a list should be verifiable per WP:V. So all the entries should have proper sourcing. If the list as a whole is unverifiable, it should eventually be deleted. However, in this case, there appear to be a fair number of motorcycle clubs with Wikipedia articles under Category:Motorcycle clubs. Those clubs, at a minimum, could be included in this list assuming that the corresponding articles meet normal Wiki standards. So basically since this list should include as a subset the articles in the category, it is in part a list of articles as well as a list of clubs that might not have Wiki articles but that are otherwise verifiable and somehow worth mentioning (ie don't quite meet the standards for their own article, but are notably referenced somewhere). Dugwiki 18:23, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment/article redone just now: I just retooled the entire article to this version. Please judge the AfD based on that for concensus. - Denny 18:25, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- Delete. Rightly, this should not be a list of external links, and as a list of internal links this completely duplicates Category:Motorcycle clubs. Why not just stick with that? Mangojuicetalk 20:26, 27 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- To answer your question, it is perfectly acceptable to have a list that duplicates a category. The reason is that a list can potentially provide additional information the category can't. For example, in this particular case, the list could provide verifiable almanac style information alongside each entry on the actual city and state of the organization's headquarters, relative sizes, date of founding, and so forth. In addition, the list can include some organizations which do not have full Wikipedia articles and thus would not appear in the category. Simultaneously, the category is useful because it acts as a good subcategory for indexing of articles within its parent, so that if a reader is browsing the parent looking for groups related to hobbies they're interested in the corresponding articles are easy to find.
- Keep Fair cop guvnor, the page as it was before was absolutely appalling. It real reason for existence is that an editor of Motorcycle club has been very efficient in enforcing notability on mentioning in the article any motorcycle club. Thus there are article on Wikipedia not linked to from the article motorcycle club, so this was an attempt to stop / redress the numerous edits made to "Motorcycle club" where editors keep adding links. If you study the very long talk page over at "Motorcycle club" you note there has been a lot of debate around this subject trying to ascertain what is and what isn't a motorcycle club, with different editors taking very different views. A lack of time and a distinct inability on my part to conjure up the correct forms of words to satisfy all editors has prevented me from undertaking a rewrite as per the results of that very long talk page. Some help in conjuring up some words to keep everyone happy would enable the page is be divided as per the talk.... Thus this page up for AFD is severing two purposes, holding some seemingly useful information (to someone somewhere) and trying to stem the tide of repetitive edits/vandalisms/whatever to "Motorcycle club". Hope that makes sense, do ask questions of me if i wasn't clear. Pickle 16:22, 1 March 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.