Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2012 BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award


 * 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. (non-admin closure)  TheSpecialUser TSU 00:05, 18 September 2012 (UTC)

2012 BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  Stats )

Also

There is nothing here that is worth keeping. The award process, ceremony location and presenters are detailed at BBC Sports Personality of the Year (an FL). All the winners of the different individual awards are in their respective pages (all FLs) and the most recent winners are also summarised on the main page at BBC Sports Personality of the Year. The information on the winners (2nd and 3rd) is/will be covered in BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award. When you take that away you are just left with the 7 nominees that didn't win. This achievement is non-notable and does not justify a new article and the WP:CFORK of all other information to bloat around it. Basically, these are a victim of WP:RECENTISM. You will not find the fact they made the list of 10 nominees be notable in each persons individuals careers. An anology would be FIFA Player of the Year. That (I believe) starts with a shortlist of 10 (might be more) and then goes down to three. To summarise, non-notable and/or content forking.

Full disclosure Articles for deletion/2010 BBC Sports Personality of the Year Award was previously closed as no consensus at I believe there has been no improvement or reason to keep then (or since). I am also the main contributor to the SPOTY main page & award subpages (not in anyway asserting WP:OWNership, just wanting to declare any percieved prejudice I may have.) Rambo's Revenge (talk)  18:47, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. The main article only lists the top three from each year. The individual articles by year include full lists of nominees. There is therefore something worth keeping, and it's properly sourced encyclopedic information, so I don't see how deleting these would improve the encyclopedia. --Michig (talk) 19:12, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep. Thise article is useful as it includes the other nominees, the vote percentages and a summary of their achievements. All of which are not and probably cannot be included in the main article. This information is useful and notable. --Kafuffle (talk) 20:30, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Keep Very widely covered in the British press each year. The 2011 was particularly notable for the endless press arguments over no women being nominated but every year it attracts a lot of media interest, speculation, controversy and debate. The individual articles could certainly be more detailed. It's been going for too long to be covered in adequate depth on a single page. --Colapeninsula (talk) 10:22, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. — Frankie (talk) 17:48, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * 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.