Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists

Points of interest related to Portal – Category – WikiProject – Alerts – Deletions – Cleanup – Assessment – Style – To-do

Deletion Sorting Project
(talk) Project page Lists (by ABC) Lists (by topic) Lists (computer-readable) AfD: Today, Yesterday Delsort scripts
v t e

This is a collection of discussions on the deletion of articles related to Lists. It is one of many deletion lists coordinated by WikiProject Deletion sorting. Anyone can help maintain the list on this page.

Adding a new AfD discussion

Adding an AfD to this page does not add it to the main page at WP:AFD. Similarly, removing an AfD from this page does not remove it from the main page at WP:AFD. If you want to nominate an article for deletion, go through the process on that page before adding it to this page. To add a discussion to this page, follow these steps:

1. Edit this page and add {{Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PageName}} to the top of the list. Replace "PageName" with the relevant article name, i.e. the one on the existing AFD discussion. Also, indicate the title of the article in the edit summary as it is particularly helpful to add a link to the article in the edit summary. When you save the page, the discussion will automatically appear.
2. You should also tag the AfD by adding {{subst:delsort|Lists|~~~~}} to it, which will inform editors that it has been listed here. You may place this tag above or below the nomination statement or at the end of the discussion thread.

Note that there are a few scripts and tools that can make this easier.

Removing a closed AfD discussion

Closed AfD discussions are automatically removed by a bot.

Other types of discussions

You can also add and remove links to other discussions (prod, CfD, TfD etc.) related to Lists.

Further information

For further information see Wikipedia's deletion policy and WP:AfD for general information about Articles for Deletion, including a list of article deletions sorted by day of nomination.

Archived discussions (starting from September 2007) may be found at:

• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists/archive
• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists/archive 2
• WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists/archive 3

See also Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists of people

Paulin Basinga publications

Paulin Basinga publications (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

There is no reason to have a list of someone's publications on Wikipedia, this is what Google Scholar and Research Gate etc are for. Since a PROD was contested, it has to go to AfD (perhaps speedy delete). This page should not be merged to Paulin Basinga as a long list is not useful in a BLP. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Academics and educators-related deletion discussions. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: it's odd that the article about the person isn't linked, but they have one. This list isn't needed, and I have my doubts the individual is notable either. Most ref's in their article seem to be interviews in Nigerian media, none from his home country. Suspect more "pay to publish" notability... Oaktree b (talk) 15:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: I've also nominated the article on Paulin Basinga for deletion, does not appear notable either. Oaktree b (talk) 15:48, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Health and fitness, Medicine, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 15:52, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete,
  WP:NOPAGE; the publication list is on Scopus and other databases, linked from Paulin Basinga, and doesn't warrant a separate page. I agree that a merge is unwarranted, as the content is no needed on that page (MOS). Klbrain (talk) 18:05, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

List of programmes broadcast by Zee Café

List of programmes broadcast by Zee Café (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Does not meet

• Delete The exact reverse of low-sourced articles, except most of the sources here are to Zee press releases, TV listings, usergen content, planted standard Indian news source churnalism, and India Today, which seems to be weirdly hostile and transphobic about the network's content. Nate • (chatter) 01:31, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of NHL Entry Draft broadcasters

List of NHL Entry Draft broadcasters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A

This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Ice hockey and list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Conyo14 (talk) 20:36, 18 April 2024 (UTC) [reply]

• Delete - AFAIK, we don't even have a list page for NHL broadcasters. GoodDay (talk) 21:04, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Leaning delete, I found this [1] which may help but not much else. Esolo5002 (talk) 22:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Canada and United States of America. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 01:16, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Aside from the cogent arguments cited above, with which I agree, this is absurdly trivial. Ravenswing 08:18, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: An article for just this seems a bit much. If someone wants to move the individual season information to the relevant yearly draft articles I won't stop them. Deadman137 (talk) 15:36, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Wegmans locations

List of Wegmans locations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Flatly fails

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Business, United States of America, Maryland, New York, and Virginia. Pbritti (talk) 17:52, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Please note
  WP:NOTPRICE is the specific portion of the policy that indicates lists like this should be avoided. ~ Pbritti (talk) 17:55, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Food and drink, Companies, and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:08, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Connecticut, Delaware, Massachusetts, New Jersey, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, and Washington, D.C.. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Seriously? delete per
  WP:NOTPRICE. Mangoe (talk) 23:37, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete per NOTPRICE. (Although not knowing where the nearest Burger Bar is poses serious concerns.) Clarityfiend (talk) 11:35, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per above. This is outside our remit as a general knowledge encyclopedia. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 15:20, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of the busiest airports in Iran

List of the busiest airports in Iran (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The list article goes against

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Aviation, Transportation, Lists, and Iran. Sunnya343 (talk) 04:46, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment note that about all pages in Category:Lists of busiest airports have this structure. Maybe a broader discussion is needed to determine if all these articles should be deleted or kept? 82.174.61.58 (talk) 10:43, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep
  WP:NOTSTATS require context, which this article somewhat lacks but can be easily provided, and these are statistics which would have been provided in an almanac 30 years ago even if not necessarily for Iran. SportingFlyer T·C 02:58, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  What sort of context would overcome the NOTSTATS violation? Sunnya343 (talk) 16:27, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep per Sportingflyer. Orientls (talk) 04:09, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I'd say that enplanements could be added to List of airports in Iran like List of airports in Washington (state), but I see no reason for this list to be singled out among the many in the category. These are perfectly valid statistics to compile, and while the article could be improved with prose context, I don't see the issues of "reduce readability", "may be confusing", or "so lengthy as to impede the readability of the article" that are the basis of NOTSTATS. Here, we see "the statistics can be split into a separate article" in practice, and List of airports in Iran or even Transport_in_Iran#Airports_and_airlines could include recommended summarization. While some pages that are primarily statistics may focus on too narrow a topic for encyclopedic significance or at least a stand-alone article, this is generally considered relevant and sources like [2][3][4][5] show some media interest. Reywas92^Talk 19:55, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Most of those are

  WP:SIGCOV is not met. The MEED source does provide some analysis, but it's only discussing the statistics from April 2016 to January 2017. Sunnya343 (talk) 16:30, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  The article is not about Iranian Airports Company, so we don't have to have sources independent of the Iranian Airports Company. There's nothing wrong with using primary news sources, they just have to be used with appropriate care to avoid bias or original research. Reywas92^Talk 16:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of French Open broadcasters

List of French Open broadcasters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Nothing appears to have changed since the last AfD a month ago.

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Tennis, Lists, and France. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 18:43, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure on this - Is this up for deletion because the article is in bad shape, or that it shouldn't be here regardless? We have List of Wimbledon broadcasters and List of Australian Open broadcasters articles that appear to be sourced much better and are laid out in a satisfactory style. The flags for countries would certainly have to go as against MOS. If this was done in a Wimbledon like style would there be objections? Fyunck(click) (talk) 09:07, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think that if there are secondary sources that back up the level of detail included at the Wimbledon article, that would be a good model to follow. The Australian Open article seems lighter on analysis and less obviously makes a case for meeting

WP:LISTN, but is still as you note in better shape than the French Open article at issue. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 12:36, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

List of Girabola seasons

List of Girabola seasons (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Per

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Football, Angola, and Lists. Svartner (talk) 09:12, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment Shouldn't you include everything linked to? Category:Girabola seasons Dream Focus 11:15, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• No, Svartner doesn't advocate deletion of the individual seasons, just the overarching list - which adds exactly nothing to the category. Geschichte (talk) 16:53, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Exactly, my question is whether there is a separate list if the main article already includes a list of seasons. Svartner (talk) 20:38, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Its unneeded. also kind of goes against
  WP:NOTDIRECTORY. The way the article is made, it may as well just be a category page. Shadow311 (talk) 19:10, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete The seasons are listed in the template. If no other information is in the list article, it becomes pointless. Dream Focus 23:24, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. GiantSnowman 18:25, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep and expand/improve, in-line with List of Premier League seasons etc. This is Morocco's Angola's top football competition. GiantSnowman 18:32, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment (I am at abstained vote here.) This list could be more useful if done right. As GS pointed out we do have them. And @GiantSnowman: this is the Angolan league, not the Moroccan! :/ Govvy (talk) 19:29, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Sorry, getting Girabola mixed up with Botola! GiantSnowman 20:16, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete without prejudice - at the moment this is a duplicative, unnecessary article, but there's the potential for a better article here if someone wants to create something more detailed. SportingFlyer T·C 20:01, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Svartner, Shadow311, Dream Focus, Govvy, and SportingFlyer: I have started the process of converting into a proper list a la List of Premier League seasons, just need someone with time and knowledge to help... GiantSnowman 20:27, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Using RSSSF which lists all the champs... GiantSnowman 20:34, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  ...and I've just noticed has pages for every individual season, such as 1979, 1980 etc. As such, if you still don't want to keep, please agree to draftify so I can work on it. GiantSnowman 20:36, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  No problem with draftification, but I do hope it's more comprehensive than just what's on the Girabola page. SportingFlyer T·C 15:56, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  ...which it would be if you check my edits to this article... GiantSnowman 20:41, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There is a big difference between the Premier League and the Angolan championship. The list of seasons is duplicated, as it is also included in the main article Girabola. Svartner (talk) 00:19, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Girabola#Girabola_participation_details list all the information doesn't it? Dream Focus 02:02, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That section is absolutely incomprehensible! I have deleted. GiantSnowman 20:39, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep I'm with GiantSnowman here. This article needs work, but that is not a reason for deletion, especially if it not an obvious
  WP:TNT. This article has a lot of potential à la List of Premier League seasons, so it's not a TNT. Anwegmann (talk) 23:16, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

List of programmes broadcast by Colors Kannada

List of programmes broadcast by Colors Kannada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails to meet

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Lists, and India. CNMall41 (talk) 05:21, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Companies-related deletion discussions. CNMall41 (talk) 05:22, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Wikipedia is not a TV Guide. Pages like this should not exist only to list the programmes that the channel offers but should also describe the site in an encyclopedic manner, offering detail on achievements. Per nom fails
  WP:NLIST. RangersRus (talk) 13:29, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

List of tallest structures in the Commonwealth of Nations

List of tallest structures in the Commonwealth of Nations (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject doesn't seem to meet the

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Architecture and Lists. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 18:48, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It's not hard to look at whatever respective country articles you want to compare; there's no indication the Commonwealth has anything to do with skyscrapers. Reywas92^Talk 22:28, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom and Reywas92. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 04:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Clearly we won't create a List of tallest structures in the BRICS]. Abhishek0831996 (talk) 11:46, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Through the Dragon's Eye episodes

List of Through the Dragon's Eye episodes (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Looking back in articles history the sources given were links to youtube videos which were removed because of unclear copyright status - which appears to be where these plot summaries are lifted from (example ep1 matching the plot summary in this article exactly). This makes me think that the article is a possible copyvio itself. Either way the plot summaries excessive, and this is not an encylopedic list. -- D'n'B-t -- 09:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Television-related deletion discussions. -- D'n'B-t -- 09:47, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Education, Lists, and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:52, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Shakira tribute albums

List of Shakira tribute albums (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Contested

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Albums and songs and Lists. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 20:55, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete: Fails
  WP:OR. StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 21:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Delete per above: If more releases were notable then I would still recommend converting to Category:Shakira tribute albums, but there's nothing here worth keeping anyway. QuietHere (talk | contributions) 22:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete - The policy-based arguments by everyone above are correct. Also note that upon inspecting some of the listings, most of these "tribute" albums are made up of cover versions recorded by unknown studio musicians and remixes by equally unknown DJs. Just about all of them are attempts by shysters to sponge money off a famous person's success, and all failed to generate notice. That same notice is required for an article here. ---DOOMSDAYER520 (TALK|CONTRIBS) 12:45, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom. >>> Extorc.talk 18:32, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign interventions by Russia

Foreign interventions by Russia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Putting this up for deletion because the scope of the list does not seem consistent with the style or content of lists of this type in other parts of the wiki. Feels like it should be merged into something else -- like the articles about the Russian Federation. Sadads (talk) 18:14, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Lists, and Russia. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 18:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: Not sure how energy dependency goes in a list about foreign (military) interventions in Russia. The rest of the list seems fine. Oaktree b (talk) 19:23, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment List_of_wars_involving_Russia#Russian_Federation_(1991–present) and List of battles involving the Russian Federation exist already. Dream Focus 21:21, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Lists of abbreviations used on British Empire World War I medals

Lists of abbreviations used on British Empire World War I medals (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This contains potential copyright violations, it is not adequately sourced, it provides more ambiguity than guidance, lack of provenance Keith H99 (talk) 12:33, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Military-related deletion discussions. Keith H99 (talk) 12:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had some challenges with the nomination, so I may have inadvertently nominated it more than once. That I can tell, it's an article that not been nominated prior to today, and has been generally ignored. The Article is a long list that cannot possibly be attributed to reliable sources, for each and every item. This duplicates content from other sites, or hosts POV on interpretation, and is best consigned to the trash can, as I perceive it. Keith H99 (talk) 12:47, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and United Kingdom. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:06, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The incorrect information in the article prompted me to take a look at the Silver War Badge article. This needed reworking, which has been done. That article could be corrected, I fail to see that as plausible for this article, hence nomination for deletion. Keith H99 (talk) 16:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There is a single usable reference in this article, to the National Archives [6], and that content sensibly is not quoted or summarized (because it can't be). This reference could be included with a single sentence at
  WP:NOTCATALOG if it were sourced by just replicating a complete list of unannotated items found in the original. --Elmidae (talk · contribs) 06:26, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Delete - Clear violation of
  WP:NOT. Whether this is a directory or extract from the table of a textbook, it is not an encyclopaedic article. Sirfurboy🏄 (talk) 07:41, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

List of episodic appearances in CID

List of episodic appearances in CID (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Everything mentioned here (and more) is (or can be) covered in CID (Indian TV series)#Cast. Recommend redirect. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Lists, and India. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 09:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect or Merge to page CID (Indian TV series)#Cast. RangersRus (talk) 11:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• This list is not long enough for its own article and could be merged with the suggested redirect page.Sk1728 (talk) 13:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I will be adding a long list of names but please don't delete the article 103.87.143.74 (talk) 05:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please give me 2 days of time so that I can add a long list of names so that this article is independent enough. Please don't delete this article. 103.87.143.74 (talk) 05:43, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please read

WP:NLIST and add enough applicable references that discuss the list (and not just the list entries). AfDs last for a week at minimum, so you have lots of time. -MPGuy2824 (talk) 06:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

List of first-class cricket centuries by W. G. Grace

List of first-class cricket centuries by W. G. Grace (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

The cricketer does not even have the most number of first class cricket centuries. For example, Jack Hobbs does not have a page for his fc centuries. For convention, this has beend done for cricketers having more than 25 international centuries. Hence, this article should be deleted. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pharaoh496 (talk • contribs) 06:27, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly
  Talk to my owner:Online 02:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Cricket, Lists, and England. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:20, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I understand the motive for this nomination, given we usually have limit the number of articles like this to record holders for nations etc, but given Grace is probably one of the games greatest players, and one of the players instrumental in the development of the game an article like this, which is incredibly well sourced and deemed good enough to be a featured article is good enough to keep it. There is coverage in articles of his hundreds also, whether in biographies, or more recently in debate whether or not one of many of his hundreds were first class. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 09:04, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  There would be as good players. People can make properly sources articles - but its first class, and not international test cricket; not being as notable Pharaoh496 (talk) 09:49, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  This is irrelevant, as there's significant coverage of his centuries. Rugbyfan22 (talk) 17:46, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Don’t make rules by your own. It doesn’t matter if he’s the highest century scorer or not. The minimum threshold of 25 int. centuries is an informal guideline. The fact is that his centuries have been discussed and received coverage in multiple books and online articles. Clearly satisfies the criteria of
  WP:GNG. Robo^Cric Let's chat 14:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep his centuries are covered in multiple books, and therefore passes
  WP:NLIST, particularly One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources, per the above guidelines. Joseph2302 (talk) 08:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep - Notable Page and clearly passes
  WP:GNG coverage. 103.121.36.100 (talk) 03:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC).[reply
  ]

Stars and planetary systems in fiction

Stars and planetary systems in fiction (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is an extreme (almost 400kb) case of fancrufty "list of appearances of foo topic in every imaginable work" (books, comics, games...). The topic may be notable (recent talk discussion suggests

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements, Science fiction and fantasy, Popular culture, and Lists. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:29, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep (EDIT:ADDED: or replace with TompaDompa's version linked below), this is a well-organized and full article. You may not like lists like this,ad but that is no reason to delete. Some of the listings may be O.R., but, like many pages like this, the discussed information may be found at the linked articles. It provides a great deeal of encyclopedic knowledge, is easy to read, and gives readers an adequate exploration of the topic. Randy Kryn (talk) 03:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @

  not TV Tropes. TV Tropes content is not useless, and I like TV Tropes, but this list belongs on TV Tropes. There is precedent that these lists are unacceptable on Wikipedia. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Also, there is no reason that the "In popular culture" content can't be on the star pages, except if it is unacceptable content. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  TV tropes is an essay, it can be summarized as "I don't like it". I've seen this TV tropes argument come up a lot in these list discussions. Some of us like the 'In popular culture' lists and find them informative and encyclopedic, some don't. This one works and should be kept to entries which have linked articles. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:18, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Essays are easy to dismiss. How about policies like

  WP:OR? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  @

  NOTINDISCRIMINATE is policy, and it says we should not be indiscriminately listing everything in a broad topic, like works of fiction that take place near stars that aren't the Sun. Making such a list would also arguably violate our policy on original research, as we are grouping articles together in a way that is not based on what the sources say, and there is no real navigational purpose. QuicoleJR (talk) 19:16, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Comment Keeping the current version of the article is a complete non-starter. It contains blatant
  WP:PLAGIARISM all in the very first section. That being said, it could be fixed. Here's what a starting point for that might look like: Special:PermaLink/1218679535.

  It's not like we cannot have high-quality articles on topics like this—Mars in fiction, Venus in fiction, and Sun in fiction are all WP:Featured articles—but the bulk of the nearly 400 kB here consists of a TV Tropes-style list with absolutely atrocious sourcing. The article has become a dumping ground for garbage "In popular culture" content to keep it out of the articles on the stars themselves. I would certainly be in favour of keeping the article provided that it is cleaned up properly (which in this case would mean rewriting it pretty much from scratch). As the nomination alludes to, I did just that back in 2021, which caused something of a ruckus and was reverted—the PermaLink above is a minimally tweaked version of what I came up with back then. I have since located additional sources that would be useful for writing a proper article on the topic, but have held off on doing so lest it be perceived as trying to force my preferred version through and causing another stir. TompaDompa (talk) 04:15, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  I'd be happy to withdraw this if the version is replaced by https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?oldid=1218679535 and not reverted back as I gather happened before. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 14:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete or rewrite The current list is definitely not something we can keep. However, TompaDompa's version of the article does seem like an acceptable article. QuicoleJR (talk) 12:37, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

*Delete as it currently is. The current article is rife with a multitude of pretty major issues as described already - poor sourcing,

• Keep - As the previous list has been replaced by a sourced prose article, I am striking my previous recommendation to Delete. As shown by the discussions below, there is still some discussion to be had regarding the final organization of the information here, such as should it be merged anywhere or split into more than one topic, but that can be discussed after the AFD closes if needed. As far as the current AFD is concerned, I do not believe there is any cause for a deletion at this point. Rorshacma (talk) 15:05, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete per
  WP:SALAT. Far too broad to be useful. A sizable chunk of science fiction involves other planets and star systems. (Also, no Ringworld?) Clarityfiend (talk) 11:56, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

• Keep per HEY. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:18, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note, then why not just go with the version by TompaDompa mentioned and linked above? If the nominator said they'd withdraw the nom if that version is used, and !voters agree, I'm not understanding the problem, which seems to have that easy solution. Randy Kryn (talk) 12:16, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - As TompaDompa said, they attempted to rewrite the article to the version they proposed back in 2021, and after lengthy pushback on the Talk page, it was reverted back to the current version of the article. As they said that they were hesitant on changing it back to their version to avoid looking like they were independently ignoring that previous discussion, I made the statement that I would remove my recommendation to Delete if their version were used instead in order to hopefully show a consensus for them to go ahead with that rewrite. I'd imagine the other commenters and nom have similar thinking. Rorshacma (talk) 15:10, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Randy Kryn Maybe ping those editors and ask? Not everybody follows discussions after commenting. I concur that deleting is strictly inferior to replacing this with something else. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 23:22, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• In light of the above discussion, I have restored the version I linked above and will keep working on it in the coming days. Consider this a keep conditional on retaining this version. TompaDompa (talk) 17:53, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I give editors some credit for trying to clean this up, particularly as a magnet for unverified or even false
  WP:OR, but still feels extremely broad. If we got rid of the blow-by-blow list, we could perhaps find a place to merge this. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:04, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  @Shooterwalker It is rare for us to disagree, but I think the rewrite is not OR. Sources cited included tertiary encyclopedia of sf with entries on "Stars" and "planets". The topic seems notable and the rewritten version is hardly ORish - TompaDompa has extensive experience removing OR from articles, not adding it :P If I had any concern it would be whether this shouldn't be renamed to stars, planetary systems and planets in fiction, and whether List of planets in science fiction should not just redirect here. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 00:25, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  That's one way of doing it. Another way would be splitting the topic into

  Stars in fiction and Exoplanets in fiction (or Extrasolar planets in fiction). The topic here is pretty much Extrasolar systems in fiction, which is another possible title that could be considered. TompaDompa (talk) 09:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  @

  extrasolar system just a redirect to Planetary system...). A brief note on our solar system (a paragraph linking to other relevant articles, many of you that you already worked on and confirmed as notable) could head the article. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:44, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  stars in fiction and extrasolar planets in fiction, while turning planets in fiction into a disambiguation page for the latter and list of planets in science fiction (and perhaps Mercury in fiction, Venus in fiction, and so on...). TompaDompa (talk) 15:19, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Comment: My concern is that the article (X and Y in Z) is formed in a vague and

  WP:OR, and even then, it's pretty short. But if it were reI'd be willing to give it some time to develop if the article were renamed and re-scoped. Or even split, with hopes of expanding both. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:09, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

I'm not an editor, just a lowly user, but I just wanted to say I love this page and use it all the time to suggest colony names when I'm gaming. I'll be sad to see it go.

Will the historical versions of this page still be available once it's gone. 108.31.3.18 (talk) 02:00, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If it does get deleted, try the Wayback Machine as it has numerous backups of the page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 04:58, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hear you, and I hope this will be preserved in history. Even better - if someone would care enough to copy this to TVTROPES... maybe you'd like to help? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:45, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Move (or just merge? It wasn't the original scope of the article) to
  Planets in science fiction to tighten the scope and make it less arbitrary. Merge the "stars" section to Star, adding an "in fiction" section. I assume it must have had one at some point, but probably got spun off to sweep the cruft under the rug. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:03, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep per
  WP:HEY (assuming it is kept as the TompaDompa prose version). It really can't be kept the way it was though, per all the arguments made above. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 18:29, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep. This is a perfectly good article, or at any rate capable of being so, at least in the form I am seeing, which is possibly after some
  WP:OR is to be invoked when there's a problem. There's no problem here, it's just incomplete. Sure the article could become really big, maybe too big (but I mean adding material to articles so that they become bigger is not a bad thing), in which case it can be split up or trimmed using some reasonable criteria. Sure, there are articles that don't belong here on account of being too detailed about a subject. But this isn't one.

  Also I dislike terms like "fancrufty", which doesn't put me in a receptive mood as it just bourgeois snobbery and indicates that you are coming the matter with prejudgement, particularly when we are talking about "science fiction in general" rather than "Star Wars" or something. I'd prefer if terms like that are avoided. Herostratus (talk) 06:39, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  @Herostratus: If you are curious, this is what the article looked like when it was nominated. Which obviously bears very little resemblance to the current version. TompaDompa (talk) 14:52, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Wait wait wait wut? Keep and restore. Y'all practically erased the article. Why. Why would you do that. What do you think we are trying to do here??? It was better before. Well, after the article is kept we can talk about that I suppose.

  As I said, original research is only a problem if its a problem. If you're synthesizing a new idea, or implying something in error. The idea here seems to be "Lots of science fiction stories have stars and planets in them", which is not a new idea. It's just true. If you're saying the idea is "Lots of science fiction stories have stars and planets in them, and we're cherry-picking only some of them to make some point", that's not true. The writers are not doing that. It's just that the article is not complete. So what is the problem? Don't

  ALL CAPS at me about this rule and that rule. We all know there are a lot of rules here, many contradictory, and that the devil can quote scripture. Tell me in plain English why you all want to prevent the reader from getting access to this information. It's not like we're trying to decide if its worth our time to make this article. Somebody already has. It's just a question of whether or not to increase entropy by scattering this information to the wind.

  The "primary-secondary-tertiary" rubric is taken from academia. It is fine for academia (I guess) but for what we are trying to do here, not so much. It's one data point of many to consider, yes. But don't give me four legs good two legs bad. We're supposed to be using our brains here. We are talking about throwing a fair amount of some people's work into the dustbin. Tell me why, in this article, the use of primary sources degrades the reader's experience. Can you? I'm all ears. Should the article include only those entities where some obscure reviewer has randomly happened to note "This article takes place on Alph Woo" and not include those where the review randomly hasn't? Why. Why. Good grief.

  It there's stuff that's not ref'd, ref it. If you don't have the time or interest to do that (quite understandable), tag it. If there's reason to believe it's maybe not true, delete it. Keep in mind that, for good or ill, works of literature are considered reliable sources for their own contents here. We don't need refs to describe the contents or plot of a movie or book, the rubric is "To check the accuracy of this data, get a copy of the book". Otherwise 90%+ of our plot sections of books and movies would have to be deleted.

  Sorry to be harsh, but if you all are going to be trying to pull stuff like this, you are going to be called to task. It's depressing to see what we are more and more becoming. Herostratus (talk) 18:30, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  In plain English, compiling raw data about works of fiction is not Wikipedia's purpose, nor is analysing the same (it is, however, TV Tropes' and Wikia/Fandom's purpose). Compiling analysis about works of fiction made by others is, however. The latter approach has resulted in several WP:Featured articles: Mars in fiction, Venus in fiction, and Sun in fiction. TompaDompa (talk) 20:38, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Dwight Howard

List of career achievements by Dwight Howard (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is another

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sports, Basketball, and Lists. Let'srun (talk) 01:00, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. This is a harmless list of achievements rather than an indiscriminate collection of stats. Eastmain (talk • contribs) 01:11, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:HARMLESS is generally not an accepted reason to keep.—Bagumba (talk) 07:01, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Comment For reference, there's Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Carmelo Anthony , Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Chris Paul and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of career achievements by Dwyane Wade (2nd nomination).—Bagumba (talk) 06:58, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I think parts of this article do qualify as an "indiscriminate collection of information". Take the "NBA highs since 1983-84" section. Why is that season chosen as the cutoff? Who is the audience for statistics with that level of granularity? Who is going to take the time to confirm that all of that content is still up to date? The more important achievements should already be listed in the Dwight Howard article. Zagalejo (talk) 22:59, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of career achievements by Gary Gait

List of career achievements by Gary Gait (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Subject is a violation of

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Lists, and Canada. Let'srun (talk) 19:47, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom, pretty clear violation. Also, the more important info already appears in Gary Gait so doesn't need a merge. grungaloo (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Fate/Grand Order characters

List of Fate/Grand Order characters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

While I'm a big fan of Fate/Grand Order as a game, I feel this list is a behemoth that ultimately fails notability on its own, and has become more of a cruft dragon that doesn't really explain why these characters are important. The bigger issue though is a notability one: while Fate itself definitely has reactions, the harder argument is that FGO's characters on their own do in an overarching way that makes it work for

Even reception for Mash and Ritsuka would be more for them, and that could be worked into the parent game article (and as someone that tried to do a writeup on Mash, I'm not confident the sources are there) Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Fictional elements and Video games. Kung Fu Man (talk) 02:22, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Redirect The article is massive with no substance, cites all of ONE source (Anime News Network), and it might as well be written in Martian for people like me who know nothing about the games.
  ^{• whaddya want? •} 03:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Comment Changing my vote to redirect. Why the flip do I keep forgetting this is an option?

^{• whaddya want? •} 03:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete per above, article doesn't explain why this is a notable list/topic either. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:07, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 06:38, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect - I don't think it should be deleted, per
  WP:TNT to be applied far too often to articles that are not in a very good state, I think this one of those articles that actually deserves it, should it ever be spun back out. Mash and Ritsuka might be better off with their own articles in this case. MoonJet (talk) 08:24, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Redirect Per MoonJet - despite character lists being valid spin-offs, Wikipedia isn't TVTropes and there has to be something to go on to show notability. As it is, people are better served by checking the TVTropes character list. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:03, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect. Nothing more to say. Greenish Pickle! (🔔) 23:09, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. While there is lot of plot summary fancruft, I think this passes NLIST. Aside of numerous game guides/tier lists and such that one can easily find, here are some more analytical sources. Granted, some are not great (listiclis is common here), but IMHO likely sufficient for keeping this as a stand-alone list. Here's a list of best sources I found - I think it gets stronger near the end :P 1) TheGamer 2020 - not a listicle: "Fate/Grand Order: My Servants Have My Back" 2) ScreenRant 2020 listicle - but I think it counts for NLIST: "Fate/Grand Order's Weirdest Real-Life Historical Figures" 3) TheGamer 2020 - article about a specific minor character How Lobo Broke (Then Fixed) My Heart In Fate/Grand Order" 4) GameRant 2023 listicle "Fate Grand Order: Best 5-Star Servants In The Game" 5) ScreenRant 2022 listicle "Fate/Grand Order: The Top 10 Servants Coming to English, Ranked" 5) CBR 2020 listicle (overalps with TV show but IMHO still relevant) "Fate/Grand Order - Absolute Demonic Front: Babylonia: Character Guide To Every Servant" 6) academic (if likely low tier journal) article profiling another FGO minor character: Baihaqi, Iqbal, Hafiz Aziz Ahmad, and Dana Waskita. "Adaptation of historical figures into mobile game characters (case study: Hijikata Toshizo from Fate/Grand Order)." Journal of Games, Game Art, and Gamification 7, no. 2 (2022): 21-28. 7) another academic article this time covering multiple characters Tomotani, João V., and Rodrigo Brincalepe Salvador. "Testing the Astolfo Effect on newly-released servants in Fate/Grand Order." (2022). 8) again, an academic study of one of the characters Yosugandi, Evan Marchel, and Hendra Kaprisma. "Historical figures in “Fate/Grand Order”: adapting Anastasia Romanova." RUDN Journal of Studies in Literature and Journalism 28, no. 4 (2023): 712-723. 9) there are various more or less SIGCOV-meeting discussions of FGO characters in a number of other academic works, I'll just leave two examples: academic book chapter on Community-based history learning: Fate/Grand Order's Online Fan Networks and an academic article Informal Strategies for Learning History in Japanese Mass Media Visual Culture: A Case Study of the Mobile Game Fate/Grand Order. PS. Last thought: this list is linked from Fate/Grand Order - Absolute Demonic Front: Babylonia which otherwise might need its own list. Even more relevant is Fate/Grand Order: Final Singularity-Grand Temple of Time: Solomon which features brief appearances of many characters. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:06, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Ping participants so you can review my argument/sources: @

  Beemer69 @Greenish Pickle! @Kung Fu Man @MoonJet @Traumnovelle @Wcquidditch @Zxcvbnm _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:07, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  I feel like some of these may work for individual character articles, but a bigger issue is that a lot of these are either about the game or the Fate franchise itself. Like the Astolfo article isn't commentary about the characters, but how introducing a new character into Fate as a series often supercedes search results for the real world counterpart (the Astolfo effect as it were, which is due to a character that originated from *another* Fate work). As useful as a lot of these can be for specific character, even I'm wary about the idea on building a list up on primarily valnet lists Piotrus...and I'm usually in favor of using Valnet as a source.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:42, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep and cleanup/expand per Piotrus. When someone who often advances a TNT argument on fictional topics thinks this is salvageable, we should listen. Jclemens (talk) 15:29, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep This reminds me of the case with the deletion request regarding the List of Paper Mario characters article in where while the initial article seems to be that of an unnoteworthy subject, references are clearly evident with Piotrus but that this article could use a rewrite in order to comply with notability standards as it's in a rough state as of writing this. SuperSkaterDude45 (talk) 23:43, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: It seems like a split consensus between redirect and keep.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 12:58, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. LISTN specifically sets out lists where each individual member might not be notable, but the collective as a whole is notable, as a valid case. I think that personally, FGO should be banned or the like (& other gacha), but it grudgingly is a big deal with zillions of dollars flowing around. Sourcing is certainly tricky due to the game's most devoted fanbase being in Japan, but I have no doubt that a reception-of-the-FGO characters section can be written, albeit possibly with Japanese sources in addition to the ones linked by Piotrus above. (Of course, I agree that part of the issue is that the reception is tied up across appearances across the franchise, so maybe there needs to be "Characters of Fate" article... but it seems the existing style is separate articles per work, since stay/night has its own separate characters article. And this article is already very long, and would get longer if it was turned into "Characters of Fate". Oh well.). SnowFire (talk) 17:23, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of revisions and sources of 'Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad'

List of revisions and sources of 'Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad' (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military, Lists, and United States of America. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk|contribs) 10:18, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete I'm utterly baffled why this would be worthy of an article here. I see no indication why anyone should care when this report has been updated and revised. Like, obviously it would be like many CRS reports. Are the individual changes actually significant? Has anyone independently taken note of them? This is weird. Reywas92^Talk 13:29, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Ok, so the report exists, but why is it notable? This would be suitable in some military website, not here. I don't see notability. Oaktree b (talk) 15:26, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Merge to
  Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad redirects to Timeline of United States military operations and there are claims in the history of Timeline of United States military operations that a merge was performed, I see no mention of Instances of Use of United States Armed Forces Abroad in Timeline of United States military operations. So I suggest the first two lead paragraphs of this article could be merged there. ~Kvng (talk) 14:51, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 23:33, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in the Republic of Ireland

Sports broadcasting contracts in the Republic of Ireland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Ireland. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment, I found [7], [8], and [9] which may be helpful in determining notability. Esolo5002 (talk) 23:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:15, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in France

Sports broadcasting contracts in France (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and France. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:08, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unnecessary list. Shankargb (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Shankargb: Note that "unnecessary" is not a valid deletion rational. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:22, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Finland

Sports broadcasting contracts in Finland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Finland. SpacedFarmer (talk) 09:03, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unnecessary list. Shankargb (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Shankargb: Note that "unnecessary" is not a valid deletion rational. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:21, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Hungary

Sports broadcasting contracts in Hungary (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Hungary. SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:59, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Unnecessary list. Shankargb (talk) 17:44, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @Shankargb: Note that "unnecessary" is not a valid deletion rational. Hey man im josh (talk) 12:09, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:21, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No merit under

WP:NLIST BrigadierG (talk) 10:27, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete: Wikipedia isn't a TV guide, this fails to meet the
  WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 14:40, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Greece

Sports broadcasting contracts in Greece (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Greece. SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:58, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Almost reads like a directory. Lorstaking (talk) 09:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 08:20, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete: Wikipedia isn't a TV guide. This fails to meet the
  WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 14:44, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Vietnam

Sports broadcasting contracts in Vietnam (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Vietnam. SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:36, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:04, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Thailand

Sports broadcasting contracts in Thailand (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Thailand. SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:35, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment: No opinion on the page in its current format, which does seem to be
  WP:LISTCRUFT, but it's a notable topic with potential for a valid article, especially given the long-standing legal and political issues surrounding broadcasting rights for major sporting events (mostly football) since 2012, which have been widely covered.[10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19] If the page does get deleted it should be without prejudice to the creation of a proper article. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:12, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:07, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Poland

Sports broadcasting contracts in Poland (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Poland. SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:33, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment. While I agree this is problematic, I think we need a mass nomination and discussion for all entries in Category:Sports broadcasting contracts by country (due to, well, what is a Sports broadcasting contract - it is a red link here, so why do we need lists of a concept we have not even defined yet or shown it is notable?). --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:53, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  For the record, the nominator attempted that and was told that there were simply too many articles for one deletion discussion. I tend to think that it's better to try each of these list articles on their own merits. Esolo5002 (talk) 23:07, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  @

  WP:OR. 'Delete. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:53, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Not eligible for Soft Deletion.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:08, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No merit under

WP:NLIST BrigadierG (talk) 10:25, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete: Wikipedia isn't a TV guide. This fails to meet the
  WP:LISTN criteria. Let'srun (talk) 14:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Brazil

Sports broadcasting contracts in Brazil (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly
  Talk to my owner:Online 13:48, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Brazil. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 14:11, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Not eligible for Soft Deletion. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete – Per
  WP:NLIST. Sports contracts are dynamic with broadcasters, even more so with the entry of streaming. This list doesn't seem relevant. Svartner (talk) 05:02, 15 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Canada

Sports broadcasting contracts in Canada (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Canada. SpacedFarmer (talk) 14:06, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sports broadcasting contracts in the United States. 162 etc. (talk) 21:52, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I cannot see how a bunch of news announcments make a subject notable. SpacedFarmer (talk) 08:22, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment, I found [20], [21], and [22], which may help determine notabilty. Esolo5002 (talk) 23:09, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, —Ganesha811 (talk) 16:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of EuroLeague broadcasters

List of EuroLeague broadcasters (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Basketball, Lists, and Europe. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:32, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Latvia

Sports broadcasting contracts in Latvia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Latvia. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:23, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No merit under

WP:NLIST BrigadierG (talk) 10:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Lithuania

Sports broadcasting contracts in Lithuania (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Lithuania. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:23, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:42, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No merit under

WP:NLIST BrigadierG (talk) 10:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete: Wikipedia isn't a TV guide. This doesn't pass the criteria established by the
  WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 14:42, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Romania

Sports broadcasting contracts in Romania (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Romania. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:23, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep, It is not an EPG because it doesn't list upcoming events, current promotions, current schedules. We should also delete all these articles: Category:Lists of sporting event broadcasters ??? What is the difference? Cetateanul Rosu (talk) 13:58, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 14:15, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Portugal

Sports broadcasting contracts in Portugal (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Portugal. SpacedFarmer (talk) 13:15, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 07:41, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in South Korea

Sports broadcasting contracts in South Korea (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and South Korea. SpacedFarmer (talk) 23:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:22, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of home appliances

List of home appliances (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

hopelessly open-ended and best left for a category. Chris Cunningham (user:thumperward) (talk) 21:08, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Technology and Lists. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 21:17, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep No valid reason given for deletion. The rules clearly state you shouldn't delete a list because you prefer categories. List are always more useful than categories since they allow more information to be listed. Category:Home appliances exist, so this is a perfect valid navigational list. Dream Focus 22:18, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I think the problem is establishing a selection criteria. I could probably cross well over the thousand pages mark for things that could plausibly be considered a home appliance. Everything from the

  Electric screwdriver. It's too broad and I'm not sure how to make it a comprehensive article. Open to responses, currently leaning delete. BrigadierG (talk) 01:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  A reference for where a reliable source called an item a "home appliance" could be required. Dream Focus 05:25, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I just turned the article into a table and found reliable source references for some things listed on it. It also list what year the item was commercially available for the average home. Dream Focus 05:47, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge to Home appliance; a separate page is not needed. It would also duplicate Small appliance, Major_appliance#Types, and List of cooking appliances, so it's superfluous. The missing examples above seem irrelevant though, the list should have criteria that excludes brands, but would include blender and Soda machine (home appliance). I don't think exercise machines are considered appliances, but either way there are other pages that can or do list home appliances so this one is not also necessary. Reywas92^Talk 03:50, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Montenegro

Sports broadcasting contracts in Montenegro (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, Lists, and Montenegro. SpacedFarmer (talk) 16:32, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - No merit under

WP:NLIST BrigadierG (talk) 10:26, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

• Delete: Wikipedia is
  WP:NLIST. Let'srun (talk) 12:07, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Sports broadcasting contracts in the Netherlands

Sports broadcasting contracts in the Netherlands (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Television, Sports, and Lists. SpacedFarmer (talk) 16:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Netherlands-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 16:32, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:59, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Spanish words of Nahuatl origin

List of Spanish words of Nahuatl origin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ehrmagerd, werds! Wikipedia is

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Lists, and Mexico. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:51, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, I think this one could be merged into Nahuatlismo. At least some list would be OK to have there. //Replayful (talk | contribs) 18:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep intro is not a dictionary and lists is probably fine? User:Sawerchessread (talk) 16:43, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:34, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

French exonyms

French exonyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia is

List of French exonyms for Dutch toponyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

List of French exonyms for German toponyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

List of French exonyms for Italian toponyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

PepperBeast (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Geography, Lists, and Europe. PepperBeast (talk) 13:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as
  WP:LISTCRUFT, not to mention being entirely unsourced. ---- D'n'B-t -- 14:11, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Speedy Keep this was just closed as no consensus a couple weeks ago, and has been re-nominated by the same nominator. Definitely a
  WP:TROUT or possibly even sanctions may be in order. SportingFlyer T·C 18:07, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  > just closed as no consensus a couple weeks ago

  That's... that's the point of re-nominating. To... create consensus where it wasn't possible to do so before. BrigadierG (talk) 18:47, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  No, the mass deletion of all exonym listicles failed to reach consensus, so they are now listed separately. —Tamfang (talk) 19:29, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Oh. Well, that's still ridiculous then. The UN has a working group specifically on French exonyms, as does the French government, showing this is a valid encyclopedic topic. I don't know how any of you are getting to

  WP:LISTCRUFT is simply an "i don't like it" argument. SportingFlyer T·C 19:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Well, an article on the working group might be interesting. But how is an endless list of French words for places more worthy than a list of French words for spices or engine parts? —Tamfang (talk) 20:02, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  In that link, the author refers to the project as an attempt to create a database. Sure would be a shame if there was a policy called

  WP:NOTDATABASE. BrigadierG (talk) 20:23, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  This isn't a database, though, it's a valid WP:LIST. SportingFlyer T·C 22:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  In most of our lists, most of the entries have their own articles. Is there any prospect of an article about the French word for Bangkok? —Tamfang (talk) 22:12, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:NLIST specifically says the entries in the list do not need to be notable enough for their own article, just that the group or set is notable. A simple Google scholar search lends more credibility to the fact this set is notable, such as [23] [24] [25], including (but not linking here) two articles on French exonyms for Polish place names. SportingFlyer T·C 23:05, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  … I meant to add: no consensus because not all such listicles are equally trivial, i.e., some do more than belabor the obvious fact that each language adapts foreign words (including placenames) to its own phonology and orthography. —Tamfang (talk) 20:04, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Quite true. There was no consensus because there was simply too much in the nom for one discussion. My bad. So, I'm going back through the area in a more rational way. Re-listing when no consensus emerges is what's supposed to happen. PepperBeast (talk) 20:36, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - I agree with nominator, this is a case of

WP:NOTDICTIONARY BrigadierG (talk) 18:48, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 20:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Turkish exonyms

Turkish exonyms (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I've been everywhere, man. Wikipedia is

List of Turkish exonyms in Bulgaria (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

List of Turkish exonyms in Greece (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

PepperBeast (talk) 12:45, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language, Geography, and Lists. PepperBeast (talk) 12:45, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Bulgaria and Turkey. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 13:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Greece-related deletion discussions. PepperBeast (talk)
• Comment I’m not sure if this should be kept or not, but if kept it should be drastically culled. It is arguably useful for an English speaker to learn that Arnavutluk means Albania, but most of the items in this gigantic and largely pointless list are not exonyms at all, they’re just Turkish spellings or minor pronunciation changes from the local name. Mccapra (talk) 20:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete. If there were anything to say about the exonyms, it might be worth having. —Tamfang (talk) 22:09, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: I was going to urge the nominator to additionally nominate all or most of the exonym lists they could find (such as
  WP:TNT as it is poorly sourced or a sound rationale. (Just referencing a 15-year-old discussion is not enough.) Aintabli (talk) 03:09, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

  I'm not singling out. I'm just doing this at a slower pace. The original AFD got no consensus a least in part because there was too much there for one discussion. Sheesh, I'm beginning to feel like I can do no right, here. PepperBeast (talk) 04:54, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The mass deletion proposal failed because not all of the exonym lists are equally trivial. French has already been renominated, and I expect others to follow. —Tamfang (talk) 05:24, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  It would be nice to see some examples of the non-trivial exonym lists for contrast. Aintabli (talk) 15:12, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm not sure there was any such sortening, though you can certainly read through the previous discussion. I'm going to be doing some more re-nominating, but I'm conscious of both the possibility of overwhelming the AFD-sphere with too many requests and restraints on my own time, so I'm absolutely not going to be trying to blast them all out at once. PepperBeast (talk) 15:48, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: I can't say I have a strong feeling about the removal of the lists of exonyms, which was covered by the discussion in March. But seeing that this nomination currently singles out one of the lists for no reason and makes no strong points, I am against deletion. As I have pointed out, it should be discussed as part of a bundled nomination with all the other exonym lists. After a few weeks or months, the AfD from March may be followed up with an identical bundled nomination to form a solid consensus. Aintabli (talk) 03:31, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  The "strong point" is that Wikipedia is

  WP:NOTDICTIONARY. Additional points are that this is poorly ref'd and that much of the content isn't even exonyms; it's just Turkish spellings of place names. PepperBeast (talk) 12:00, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Current state of the article and its content are irrelevant when it comes to AfDs unless it’s

  WP:TNT. NOTDICTIONARY was also brought up in the previous discussion, which lacked consensus. The lack of a strong point is mainly rooted in how there is no demonstration of the list’s triviality. Examples of lists to keep could be helpful for example. Aintabli (talk) 15:10, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

• Delete: delete both as just what you would find in a dictionary Chidgk1 (talk) 09:05, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Comment @Mccapra, Tamfang, Aintabli, and Chidgk1: I added List of Turkish exonyms in Greece to this discussion. PepperBeast (talk) 12:29, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Just needs editing clean-up but there are a multitude of sources on this including books and from the UN, and it doesn't really fall into dictionary land. [26] [27], and there are probably additional sources in the Turkish. This needs cleanup, but not deletion. SportingFlyer T·C 17:26, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  But the articles don’t exist on Turkish Wikipedia as far as I can tell Chidgk1 (talk) 07:29, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  Turkish Wikipedia is in a horrible state even when it comes to Turkish-related topics. Regardless, it's not relevant. Aintabli (talk) 21:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment I see @Ushuaia1: has put a lot of effort in but as the Greece one has been unsourced for so many years I think that should also be deleted. I suggest Ushuaia1 publish the ex-Ottoman names such as Greece and Bulgaria outside Wikipedia as original research so they could explain their methods - for example if they talked to local people they could detail their recordings or correspondance or whatever as annexes to their paper. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:26, 8 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. This is clearly a personal work, in the form of an
  slippery verbiage, of which the project is more than tired. -The Gnome (talk) 16:07, 11 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Shadow311 (talk) 20:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: As indicated in the project's title, this text had been taken down after
  best preserved. -The Gnome (talk) 11:21, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]
• Keep: a useful article. Lionel Cristiano^? 22:25, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  How do you use it? —Tamfang (talk) 03:11, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  this article provides information to the reader. Lionel Cristiano^? 09:46, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  WP:ILIKEIT isn't a reason to keep. PepperBeast (talk) 11:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Every junk article "provides information to the reader," at least in the eyes of its creator. How do you use the information? —Tamfang (talk) 16:39, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of loanwords in Assyrian Neo-Aramaic

List of loanwords in Assyrian Neo-Aramaic (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ehrmagerd, werds! As interesting as I find this, Wikipedia is

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Lists. PepperBeast (talk) 12:35, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Middle East-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:43, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:35, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: the introduction is clearly not a dictionary. the list defines some words but is mostly serving the functions of a list. should be fine enough as is to keep that too User:Sawerchessread (talk) 16:41, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep: Wikipedia is not a dictionary, and this article is not a dictionary entry. I don't know what gave the nom the idea that articles about linguistics and etymology are somehow not encyclopedic, prompting them to launch their current "Ehrmagerd, werds!" deletion campaign. Owen× ☎ 14:55, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep: Does not read like a dictionary entry, it is a list – and a quality one at that. ~
  talk) 15:00, 14 April 2024 (UTC)[reply
  ]

List of Dutch loanwords in Indonesian

List of Dutch loanwords in Indonesian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ehrmagerd, werds! As interesting as I find this, Wikipedia is

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Lists. PepperBeast (talk) 12:34, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Indonesia and Netherlands. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:39, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 06:36, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Transwiki Poorly sourced too. It is a better idea to move this to Wiktionary. The Banner talk 15:32, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of French loanwords in Persian

List of French loanwords in Persian (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Ehrmagerd, werds! As interesting as I find this, Wikipedia is

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and Lists. PepperBeast (talk) 12:33, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Iran and France. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 12:38, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep the topic of French loan words in Farsi is the subject of scholarship e.g 1, 2, 3 and 4. Mccapra (talk) 20:53, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  I'm aware that it is, but we're not here due to notability concerns. If we were discussing an article about the French influence on Farsi, I'd vote to keep. The operative issue that this just a word list (a basically unref'd word list) and

  WP:NOTDICTIONARY. PepperBeast (talk) 05:02, 7 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  WP:TNTing. Curbon7 (talk) 19:51, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

  Yes,

  WP:TNT. If someone wants to do some improvement over at Persian vocabulary, that's fine. If someone wants to write an actual article on the influence of French on Persian vocabulary, that's also great. This is not that article; this is not an article. It's literally a list of words. There is nothing to salvage. PepperBeast (talk) 20:24, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply

  ]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Star Mississippi 14:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Keep: In general, same reasons as Mccapra. This article's intro could be improved, like List of loanwords in Assyrian Neo-Aramaic.

Also, comment, but we've nominated a ton of these type of "Loan words" articles for deletion today.

it seems that we are having a discussion about a large swathe of articles across multiple deletion discussion, and we should instead focus on maybe a broader discussion of these? User:Sawerchessread (talk) 18:02, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of French words of English origin

List of French words of English origin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Wikipedia is

I am also nominating the following related pages for the same reason:

List of French words of Gaulish origin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

List of French words of Germanic origin (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

List of French words of Germanic origin (A-B) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

List of French words of Germanic origin (C-G) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

List of French words of Germanic origin (H–Z) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

PepperBeast (talk) 22:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Language and France. PepperBeast (talk) 22:25, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 00:21, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you think it would be a good idea to move it to Wiktionary instead? Obviously these articles have value, so I think we should retain them, but in the other wiki. איתן קרסנטי (talk) 06:59, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar enough with Wiktionary policies to have an opinion. PepperBeast (talk) 12:24, 6 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:52, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Mae yr erthygl hon yn cynnwys llawer o eiriau sydd yn debyg iawn i eiriau Cymraeg (sydd hefyd yn iaith Geltaidd) sydd ddim yn dod o eiriau Lladin na Saesneg. Felly rydw i yn sicr ei fod yn adnodd pwysig iawn i'w chadw fel cofnod o eiriau Ffrangeg sydd yn dod o hen iaith Gaul, felly dylai gael ei chadw er mwyn ei phwysicrwydd. Nid yn unig oherwydd diwylliant Ffrangeg, ond y ddiwylliant Geltaidd sydd yn gorchuddio llawer o Orllewin Ewrop, yn cynnwys Sbaen, Y Wlad Belg, Y Swisdir, Gogledd Yr Eidal, a Gorllewin a De'r Almaen. Wrth ddileu'r dudalen hon, rydym yn dileu darn pwysig o'n hanes a'n diwylliant.

This article contains many words that are very similar to Welsh words (which is also a Celtic language) which do not come from Latin or English. Therefore I am certain it is a very important resource to be kept as a record of French and Celtic words that come from the old language of Gaul, so should be kept because of its importance. Not only for its importance in French heritage, but also for Celtic heritage which spans most of Western Europe, including Spain, Belgium, Switzerland, the North of Italy, and the West and South of Germany. Gareth ap Emyr (talk) 21:59, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment: Well, it's Euro-centric. The Academie Francaise isn't representative of French in Quebec, the Office de la Langue Francaise sets suggestions for Quebec French, which is mostly what we use here in Canada. This would need a rewrite for a more global view and most of this is unsourced. There's something here, but I'm not sure even a draft would fix this. Oaktree b (talk) 00:03, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  A selfie is égoportrait [28], literally an ego-portrait. I suppose we could draft it, but this would be a project. Oaktree b (talk) 00:08, 10 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If we were to delete this one, we'd also have to delete all similar articles, and there's a lot (five just for the lists of English of French origin). I've never encountered such lists on the Wiktionary, but it would indeed maybe make more sense to have these there. But in the end it wouldn't make any major difference. Ulysse Verjus-Tonnelé (talk) 01:10, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind they do exist on Wiktionary actually! https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:English_terms_derived_from_French Ulysse Verjus-Tonnelé (talk) 01:13, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Same for French words https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Category:French_terms_derived_from_English Ulysse Verjus-Tonnelé (talk) 01:17, 13 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep the opening context and various ancillary information are not adequately covered by the relevant Wiktionary categories. It is desirable to expand these articles into something like Influence of French on English which is an encyclopedic discussion of the topic and not just a list, but these lists are better than nothing and better than a link to a Wiktionary category. Eluchil404 (talk) 03:10, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: No consensus here yet to take any particular action with this bundled nomination.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:13, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete To be honest I'd just delete the lot of them, these seem too niche to be of interest here, without some further scholarly discussion around these words, which seem to be missing from the article. Oaktree b (talk) 23:26, 16 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]
• Draftify per @Eluchil404:'s recommendation of expanding the article to be similar to Influence of French on English. It has problems with the way it's currently written, but it isn't unrecoverable. Ships & Space_(Edits) 01:40, 17 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sports broadcasting contracts in Estonia

Sports broadcasting contracts in Estonia (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View AfD | edits since nomination)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)