Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Index of Gibraltar-related articles


 * 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. JForget 22:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Index of Gibraltar-related articles

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Too small of a list to be useful. All of these are already linked from Gibraltar and/or Category:Gibraltar. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Many otters • One bat • One hammer) 21:51, 2 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I agree. WikiProject Gibraltar/publicwatchlist is much more comprehensive and updated frequently. --Gibmetal 77 talk 22:01, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment -- The project watchlist is not a WP article, but part of a WP project. The value of lists (and probably the only one), compared to categories, is that they can contain redlinks, and this one contains none.  If kept, rename to List of Gibraltar-related articles, but probably better not to have it at all.  Peterkingiron (talk) 22:36, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 23:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of UK-related deletion discussions. Thryduulf (talk) 23:06, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Fine per WP:CLN, just needs some editing love; although I wish MediaWiki could just generate these automatically from cats. --Cyber cobra (talk) 23:35, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete as this is not appropriate per WP:CLN due to its broad scope and also because the topic is a self reference. This is the proper topic for a category as it organizes material but without an encyclopedic analysis of it. The biggest difference between lists and categories are that lists are encyclopedia articles while categories are not. This "article" is more like an index than an article, so the contents should be categorized instead of listified. The only way this article would be appropriate is if the topic of the article, the "index of gibralter-related articles" itself was notable, and the collection of our gibralter-related articles has not been commented upon in reliable third, party sources.  Them  From  Space  02:00, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * What if it were trivially renamed to "Index of Gibraltar-related topics"? No self-ref then. --Cyber cobra (talk) 20:18, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. Good faith contribution, but information completely duplicated by the category. But I'm sure contributions would be welcomed at WikiProject Gibraltar Chris Neville-Smith (talk) 17:58, 7 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete. We don't need yet another way to categorise our articles. We have categories, we have lists, have have navigational templates - we don't need alphabetical indices. The navigational tempate for this topic knocks this index for six, by the way. Fences  &amp;  Windows  01:59, 8 October 2009 (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.