Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2020 FireKeepers Casino 500


 * 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 speedy keep. Updated nomination based on edits by. (non-admin closure) Kaisertalk (talk) 06:08, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

2020 FireKeepers Casino 500

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This article is about an event that has not occurred as of yet i.e. a future event. However, sections of the article have been written as if the event have already been completed.

E.g. Commentators who have called the race.

In addition, the page also has empty tables e.g. starting grid, finishing results etc.

Recommending that this article be deleted / moved to draft and reintroduced once the event is over. Alternately, this article should be rewritten as an upcoming event with all future dependent actions modified accordingly and the tables removed.

Good luck, Kaisertalk (talk) 04:57, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Speedy Keep. Updating nomination to a speedy keep based on the updates from. Thanks. Good luck at the races. Kaisertalk (talk) 06:08, 16 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Speedy keep AfD is not cleanup. No valid reason for deletion has been suggested. If the article needs to be rewritten, that is an editing issue. Seems to be sufficiently sourced and likely to occur that there is no WP:CRYSTAL issue. No discussion of WP:BEFORE. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:04, 11 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Redirect to a date agnostic page or attempt a WP:HEY and rewrite this article as a future event (future tense) with unknowns removed, including starting grid, ending leaderboard etc.

Also, in somewhat of a light vein, with due respect to, and acknowledging the immense experience brings along, suggesting that this page needs to exist because the event is likely to occur is akin to suggesting that every living personality on wikipedia should have a "Death of " page done and ready. Because like the famous quote goes -- only death and taxes are certain events. Cheers, and I defer to the larger guidance of this AFD group. Kaisertalk (talk) 01:24, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * I didn't say that the articel needed to exist because the event was likely to occur. What I said, or at least intended to say was that, since the event was likely to occur, it being in the future is not a reason to delete it. The reason for it to exist is that it has gotten enough coverage to demonstrate notability, which your examples would not have. In any case the person nominating an article for deletion should show policy-based reasons why the article should not exist. Problems which can be fixed by simply editing the article are not reasons to delete. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


 * Good deal . I definitely do not want to misinterpret what you have stated. In the same vein, I will also add a minor clarification that I didn't recommend that this needs to be deleted because it is a future event. My concern is that this page is / was written as a future event that has already been completed. E.g. Commentators X and Y called the race. Also, empty tables for the leaderboard, starting grid etc.


 * Also, I see your point -- you are saying that all of the above quality issues should be corrected by editing the article.


 * My thinking is that this should be in the draft space and should not come into mainspace until it is fixed and or the event is over. Alternately, a redirect to a higher level page.


 * Now, the irony is that this style of article build out has been done for more than one of these races. Funnily, the author has been removing the delete boxes, or recommendations even while the conversation is occurring.


 * But, all these aside -- if the outcome of the AFD process is a redirect or a move to draft that would be the best outcome to ensure that a Wikipage doesn't appear online with such glaring lapses.


 * In closing note, like I mentioned earlier, I defer to your good judgement. You have been extremely kind and patient with me on WP:TEAHOUSE when I (or others like me) would ask questions, and I truly believe that you are a great ambassador for Wikipedia. Please recommend as you deem fit (from a decision standpoint), and I will follow your lead. Good Evening. :)


 * Kaisertalk (talk) 01:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for those kind words, . I do my best at the Teahouse and elsewhere to help out. But I am still only one editor, more experienced than some, less so than some others. Since this discussion has been opened, it should proceed until closed by an uninvolved admin or experienced editor. As I have expressed a view here, i will not be that person. You have corectly understood the basic thrust of my argument, that since ordinary editing can fix this, deletion is not needed. Please note for the future that a move to draft does not require an AfD to authorize it. See WP:DRAFTIFY. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 02:00, 12 July 2020 (UTC)


 * I understand . Thanks much again. Have a good evening. I will read-up on those links.Kaisertalk (talk) 02:21, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Keep I don't see the point of bringing something like this through the (potentially) drawn-out AfC process when the event itself is less than a month away. The topic is clearly within WikiProject NASCAR's standards.  Willsome 4 29  (say hey or see my edits!) 20:18, 12 July 2020 (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.