Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2001 Nobel Peace Prize


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was Keep . Withdrawing nomination. You have still provided zero proof that these need to exist independently of the main article and I will seek merge by other means. Reywas92 Talk 15:13, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

2001 Nobel Peace Prize

 * – ( View AfD View log )

I am also nominating the following related pages:

One sentence is not an article. These articles are completely redundant to List of Nobel Peace Prize laureates. Although the past two years generated significant controversy, there is abolutely no need for articles about every single prize the Nobel committee has given. Reywas92 Talk 15:06, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment Just so I'm clear, exactly which policy does this violate?  Lugnuts  (talk) 17:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * They are entirely redundant and do not show notability beyond what is already in the numerous related articles already existing.
 * Keep. There's extensive coverage of every Nobel Prize award, and plenty of material available for expansion of each of these articles.  For the same reasons that we can have an article about every episode of Doctor Who (and I am fine with that), we can and should pursue more detailed articles about each of these awards.--Arxiloxos (talk) 17:32, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a bad comparison and you know it. I've looked, and the only other significant information is the laureate speeches. It would be completely unnecessary to copy biographies, and articles should not just be quotes from the organization. Perhaps I should have gone for a merge rather than delete, but if we already have Shirin Ebadi, WHY do we need 2003 Nobel Peace Prize? It would be better to expand that than to have a separate, redundant content fork. Reywas92 Talk 01:13, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I appreciate your point of view but I don't agree. In many years there's advance discussion about potential winners (especially for Peace and for Literature). The award ceremonies are always well covered, and the lectures (again, especially for Peace and for Literature) provoke discussion and commentary. This is the sort of material that would be more appropriately covered in articles about the individual prizes.--Arxiloxos (talk) 03:36, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The laureate gives the lecture, makes sense to write about his/her speech and the response in his/her own article. The ceremony is dedicated to the recipient, makes sense to include what the committee did for him/her in his/her own article. "In X year, laureate Y won the prize ahead of other potential winners A, B, and C." Anyway, unless there's a realiable source that another person is nominated (losing nominees are kept secret), speculation is simply meaningless pundit speculation, especially since a person could win the next year, or the year after that. There is aboslutely nothing that wouldn't contribute well in the recipients' articles, if not already in them. Reywas92 Talk 22:26, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep and hopefully expand. These articles have a lot of potential and should be improved rather than deleted. Mark Arsten (talk) 19:31, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Rather, the already existing sections in the laureate articles and the relevant list have already fulfilled most of this potential. I think I will withdraw this nomination and seek a merge. Reywas92 Talk 01:13, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep WP could get along without the articles, but each prize is certainly notable, and of lasting importance. BigJim707 (talk) 21:35, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
 * That's why the laureates have sections about their winning the prize. That's why we have a main list of all the recipients. With Wangari Maathai, there should not be Reywas92 Talk 01:13, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Politics-related deletion discussions.  — • Gene93k (talk) 23:32, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep Each and every single Nobel Peace Prize is notable, as it is not only the source of worldwide media attention, but subject to eternal coverage in a variety of works. Length is not an issue at all at AFD, people are free to create stubs. Also, the article could just as easily be expanded to a similar length of for instance 2010 Nobel Peace Prize, which is a GA and currently at FAC. Arsenikk (talk)  21:57, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Absolutely not a reason that there need to be separate articles. The eternal coverage, which is almost always about the person and works, not the prize itself, can be included in the main articles. 2010 Nobel Peace Prize is a subarticle of Liu Xiaobo, which split when it got too long. The material is not about the prize, but Liu's winning of the prize. Unlike the others, there is actually enough information to require a split. They can be resplit in the unlikely event it becomes necessary.
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.