Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/FIM Women's Motorcycling World Championship


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. — Cactus Writer (talk) 01:03, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

FIM Women's Motorcycling World Championship

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

I don't believe this meets WP:GNG. Little significant coverage in independent sources. Tvx1 22:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. Tvx1 22:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment – It's an FIM sanctioned World Championship-level event, which is running for the first time in just under a fortnight. This nomination seems premature, notability looks very likely to develop at the moment. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 00:51, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Women, Events,  and Europe.  WC  Quidditch   ☎   ✎  02:15, 4 June 2024 (UTC)


 * The first season of this newly established World Championship is due to begin in just under two weeks. Coverage has been limited to motorsports-focused outlets such as Speedweek (example here), Eurosport (example here), and others (Road Racing World, Paddock-GP.com). Deletion is entirely unwarranted, given that this is a World Championship sanctioned by the same governing body that oversees events such as MotoGP, WorldSBK, and others. Mathias327 (talk) 07:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Well, to be clear, notability isn't inherited from parent topics (WP:NOTINHERITED) nor is it conferred by equivalent topics (WP:OTHERSTUFF). There does seem to be some coverage at the moment, maybe not enough for an article, but there will almost certainly be enough coverage in two weeks' time. Is it worth it to delete or draftify this article and then recreate it in, say, a month? I don't think so. Arguably it doesn't pass notability standards right now, but we ought to be pragmatic here. 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 09:04, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Interesting nomination. But disappointing, per 5225C and Mathias327. This is what happens when inexperienced, over-zealous editors 'pirate' what others have written; sometimes it's almost like a competition - who can get it on to WP first. I often see this with racing deaths, contrary to wp notmemorial, when there is nothing/insufficient previously written about the racer, being an also-ran. See Paul Dobbs, Victor Steeman, Billy Redmayne, Dean Berta Viñales. I'm sure you're all aware that I wrote it, purposely as a section (in February 2024) as nothing had then (yet) happened. I'm equally sure you've read what I wrote here, being toosoon, permastub, crystal - "There is simply no need for a separate article at this premature stage".Having established that, I disagree that it should be draftified; such action, whilst admitting that some coverage may be available soon, could be regarded as pointy. However the mechanism, it's there, so yes, pragmatism in that redirect (back to) section may be just a retrograde/administrative move (I am an inclusionist).Keep. Considering what's happening with women's participation in certain sports, and the positive discrimination to enable them, then I think the article is a 'net-positive' to the project, although, considering the nationalities of the participants, will likely be of more-interest to European, non-English first speakers. Considering positive discrimination, I can cite WIR (with which I disagree, being a determined effort to skew the natural balance).--82.13.47.210 (talk) 23:47, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Nobody WP:OWNs the rights to an article, nor is Wikipedia a platform for advancing social change (WP:SOAPBOX). 5225C (talk &bull; contributions) 23:57, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Already more than enough SIGCOV to pass GNG. --John B123 (talk) 11:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep Appears to be enough independent coverage to satisfy the general notability guidelines to me.  Malinaccier  ( talk ) 00:31, 11 June 2024 (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.