Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Big questions


 * 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 delete. Michig (talk) 09:17, 18 November 2018 (UTC)

Big questions

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This is as pure an example of an indiscriminate list comprised of original research as I've ever seen; the "big question" is whatever question one happens to want to know the answer to at the time (I can provide an impeccable Reliable Source that The Big Question is "what's the difference between a tangerine, satsuma and clementine?"). Neither of the two cited sources even use the phrase "big question" at any point. I have no doubt that this was created in good faith, but this is a misunderstanding of what the Wikipedia mainspace is for; at absolute most this should be split into FAQs at the Reference Desks. &#8209; Iridescent 08:21, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Religion-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Science-related deletion discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 09:09, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * We don't have a lot of articles where the title is actually a question. The ones that we do have seem to have been so titled because the question is of such universal currency that it is more descriptive than a declarative statement of the topic. It's a rare criterion and as such seems to be worth a navigation list of some sort. Whether these have to be titled "big questions" is debatable, but as a useful hub list I would lean Keep. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:40, 11 November 2018 (UTC) Aaaand... double check shows I am wrong: I was pretty sure that at least "Why is the sky blue?" and "What is the meaning of life?" are the titles of the respective articles rather than redirects, but it seems none of these are. Colour me embarrassed; this kinda moots my argument. -- Elmidae (talk · contribs) 10:44, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * @Elmidae, there shouldn't be articles with question marks in the name, other than when the question mark itself forms part of a proper name (e.g. Did You Hear What Happened to Charlotte King?). The only exception of which I'm aware is Who is a Jew?, and that's because nobody can ever agree on whether it should point to Jewish identity or Jew. &#8209; Iridescent 13:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * I created the article, and as I noted on the talk, this was discussed at WP:VP/I, with substantial affirmation. The article as I created it is in a new form, that's why its yet undeveloped, and requires you to help perfect it. And this is what Wikipedia is actually for, developing articles not deleting them. * I created the article, and as I noted on the talk, this was discussed at WP:VP/I, with substantial affirmation. The article as I created it is in a new form, that's why its yet undeveloped, and requires you to help perfect it. Articles just simply don't start off as perfect. The topic is a clear keep, though it could be renamed. -Inowen (nlfte) 10:57, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * No, that's not what Wikipedia is for; you're thinking of Quora. We don't do, and never have done, a question-and-answer format here; Wikipedia is an tertiary source encyclopedia, not the FAQ page for the internet. Looking at the Village Pump thread you link, I don't see a single person supporting your suggestion, let alone "substantial affirmation"; the closest I see is someone suggesting that although such a page isn't appropriate for Wikipedia, it might be suitable for Wikibooks. &#8209; Iridescent 13:58, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * @Iridescent. Its not a question-answer format, or the promotion of such. Wikipedia is not Quora, certainly, but some questions are perennial, and its not wrong to list some questions as entities in their own right. Why is the sky blue? for example is a now-classic introductory question to photon physics and cognitive optics, to talking scientifically about nature itself. Where did we come from? is a classical way of talking about human creation, either theistic or atheistic, life-genesis and evolutionary biology. Who is a Jew? is an example of a question-form which solves an editorial difficulty, but isn't really a general question, just a speciality question in the ethnic area. Some questions are universal is the simple point, and thats why some of the questions I listed off-hand were already extant as redirects, like Are we alone in the universe? So according to pre-existing editing form, redirects are a is a legitimate ways of handling question links, and question links are a legitimate string for making redirects. Compiling a list of questions is simple. -Inowen (nlfte) 19:13, 11 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete This just isn't what article space is for. It's far more amorphous than listing unsolved problems in a specific area of science, and we have enough trouble doing that. We could, however, have a page over in the "Wikipedia:" domain, like What Wikipedia has to say about Big Questions, which collects Questions That Have Been Considered Big and lists articles that are relevant to them. That would be harmless and possibly entertaining. XOR&#39;easter (talk) 15:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete The existence of the page suggests a lack of understanding of what Wikipedia is about. As Inowen said, "Wikipedia is not Quora" and I think the article should be removed for that reason. Alssa1 (talk) 20:52, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete FWIW - yes - *entirely* agree with the comments above regarding the deletion of the proposed "Big questions" article - seems a very recently created similar article, "Brief Answers to the Big Questions (book)", about a newly released book by Stephen Hawking, may (or may not) have inspired (perhaps to some extent?) the article currently being discussed for deletion - this new Hawking book article seems much more appropriately notable and consistent with the goals of Wikipedia, whereas the proposed "Big questions" article is not imo atm - hope this helps in some way - iac - Enjoy! :) Drbogdan (talk) 00:30, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Delete Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 15:13, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete - entirely subjective. For me, What should I cook for dinner? is the big questions I contemplate most. Agricolae (talk) 19:01, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Snow Delete: This discussion is already longer than the article, which doesn't have sufficient sourcing to show a standalone article is needed.--Milowent • hasspoken 21:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete Just arrived there via STicki while reviewing recent changes. There are no criteria for inclusion on this list - how could we exclude anything from it? 'Did I leave the hob on?' can be a much bigger question than 'is there intelligent extraterrestrial life?', at least for a forgetful individual... Girth Summit  (blether)  21:51, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Delete per above. These questions should be listed in sections in articles about philosophy, science, religion, etc. Levivich (talk) 23:48, 16 November 2018 (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.