Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2022 November 30

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Italian Winter Throwing Championships (talk|edit|history|logs|links|watch) (XfD|restore)

In my opinion you should restore the page that was deleted by a "mere mistake" without any consensus from the community (one upkeep vote and one redirect vote). Incidentally, the redirected page does not contain as much information as the original page did. Kasper2006 (talk) 12:14, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Fixed malformed listing. Stifle (talk) 12:23, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse (voted redirect). The close was not a "mere mistake." This AFD was up for over a month and there was only a single "keep" vote that was more of an
  WP:SIGCOV in the article whatsoever. Also, the whole point of a redirect is not to contain as much information as the original page, but to briefly mention/summarize. Frank Anchor 13:37, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment with limited participation in the AFD, the close could be considered the redirect equivalent of a
  WP:GNG. Frank Anchor 14:10, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  Disagree that it is wise to give this advice. Firstly, the AfD decision should be afforded respect. Secondly, User:Kasper2006 does not appear competent to judge unilaterally when the reason for redirection have been overcome. SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:13, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Endorse I agree with the closing statement here, the Keep argument did not address the concerns in the nomination. The fact that almost all the sources cited come from the organisation responsible for the event is a serious problem, the
  verifiability policy (which is very important) expects the articles should be based on independent sources. The only independent sources cited were [1] (a very brief announcement that the event had been cancelled) and [2] (a dead link). If there are better sources out there then I suggest trying to improve the page as a draft. Hut 8.5 17:53, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Endorse. There are two delete/redirect votes and one keep vote. Unfortunately, additional input was not obtained after three relists. Therefore, I agree with
  WP:ATD. Hence, I think the close is a reasonable conclusion. Thanks. VickKiang (talk) 21:34, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Endorse - The appellant doesn't seem to understand that
  secondary sources, because their Keep argument is that their sources are primary. The only "mistake" that I see is the appellant's misunderstanding of policies. There was no mistake by the closer. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:07, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Endorse the AfD close as consensus to redirect. Any future attempt to establish a consensus to reverse that decision should be made at the redirect target talk page, Talk:Athletics in Italy. Not here at DRV as there was no deletion. —SmokeyJoe (talk) 22:10, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. There is also a semi-related thread at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#User not going to deletion review after AfD decision he didn't agree with relating to this DRV. Thanks. VickKiang (talk) 22:15, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]
• Endorse as nominator. The one keep !vote was very weak and did not address notability concerns and used
  WP:ALLORNOTHING reasoning.LibStar (talk) 22:20, 30 November 2022 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Comment Since it is a national athletics championship, if anything, a redirection Italian Athletics Championships would be more correct. --Kasper2006 (talk) 06:20, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• I agree this probably would be a better target, I was unaware that page existed when I suggested Athletics in Italy. Frank Anchor 13:58, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

• Draft So. Two non-Fidal national sources have been included in the draft (the second is from one of the most authoritative Italian national newspapers, La Stampa of Turin). In the quotas it is better explained why the national championship of throws has a reason to exist (in winter for long shots the indoor arenas cannot be used for obvious reasons) and in the second one that in any case the Italian championship has a national and not a regional value. --Kasper2006 (talk) 06:51, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  To clarify that, as the DRV filer, are you supporting creation of a draft to submit through AfC? Thanks. VickKiang (talk) 07:20, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Beyond the acronyms, I'm just trying to understand why the presence in the encyclopedia of a page of a national championship of an important sport like athetics is considered useless. That's why I want to respect the procedures and regulations and I'm therefore responding to those who objected that the only source was from the national federation that organizes them, even if I don't understand what harm there would have been by adding two sources from national newspapers. And above all because we want to consider an event that is irrelevant at national level. Kasper2006 (talk) 09:17, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for your comment. I don't believe anyone here has suggested that the page is useless. It's just that IMO there is consensus in the discussion that this fails notability guidelines

  WP:SPORTSEVENT. Additionally, would it be acceptable if your work be submitted from AfC for review by another neutral experienced editor? I get that you are passionate about this topic but looking at this thread right now the original closure would probably be endorsed, so submitting a draft for review is probably the best route you can take. Thanks. VickKiang (talk) 09:35, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Thanks to you. I will listen to your advice, as soon as I find a minute, maybe tomorrow, I will send it to the AfC. Kasper2006 (talk) 17:47, 1 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]