Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Formula One driver numbers (2nd nomination)

. 
 * 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. Please initiate Rename/Move proposals at the tallk page. (non-admin closure) Winged Blades Godric 04:19, 19 April 2017 (UTC)

List of Formula One driver numbers

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This has been nominated before resulting in no consensus. As that means no clear consensus to keep either, I'm starting a fresh discussion. The issues which existed back then still exist today. This is very trivial has little appeal beyond the Formula 1 fans. The numbers that are used during the current season are always listed in the article for the current season and in the drivers' and constructors' articles. All this lists adds to that is the couple of former drivers that still hold the rights to a number and the one number that has been permanently retired. That does not seem to be enough for a standalone article for this concept that has only been in use for a minimal period of Formula One's total existence. Moreover, F1 cars carried numbers before 2014 as well and those are completely ignored. Tvx1 16:29, 11 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep or rename Formula One driver numbers and expand. The numbers satisfy WP:GNG, and are often associated with specific drivers apparently (e.g. #5 and Nigel Mansell and a list of "Iconic F1 numbers"). Clarityfiend (talk) 02:45, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:34, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. North America1000 03:34, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * As I pointed out in my rationale, those iconic numbers like Mansell's 5 or Hill's 0 aren't mentioned in this list. It only relates to the 2014 concept. Also, Wikipedia is not a F1 fansite. We're not here to list F1 fans' favorite numbers.Tvx1 12:46, 12 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Comment – The previous AfD discussion is located here. North America1000 03:36, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep and rename Formula One driver numbers. The renamed article can currently comfortably accomodate the list within it. Fatty wawa (talk) 03:59, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Delete per nomination. I used to support this list, but I feel it does not do any good and is just a useless trivia as numbers are shown in every season's article. – Sabbatino (talk) 14:49, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yes, but it can be expanded to explain the current and past numbering systems and number associations (with a renaming and scope broadening). Clarityfiend (talk) 06:22, 13 April 2017 (UTC)
 * That would mean that every single number from the past should be listed and that is not needed as every F1 season's article has them listed. Why do you feel the need to duplicate the same information elsewhere? – Sabbatino (talk) 13:15, 13 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep – Upon consideration, meets WP:LISTPURP as a functional navigational aid. This is evidenced in part by the 5,273 page views the page has received in the last thirty days. Full disclaimer: Note that I closed the previous AfD discussion, located here, as no consensus in February 2016, but this does not preclude me from contributing to this discussion. North America1000 14:58, 12 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Just how is this a navigational aid? The numbers don't link anywhere. It's duplication anyway. All those numbers are already listed in the season articles as well.Tvx1 16:04, 12 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep Per Calirty and NA1000. L3X1 (distant write)  21:14, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * And AFD is not a vote. You need to give guideline and or policy based arguments to justify your stance. Pure votes are likely to be disregarded by the person who closes this. Thus simply put "clarity" is not a valid reason to keep (or delete) an article. Especially as this content is already present in other places.Tvx1 21:37, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Like I haven't read about the policy re: VFD. I suppose you're going to appeal this one as well? And it passes NOTSTATS. L3X1 [[User talk:L3X1| (distant write)

]] 02:08, 18 April 2017 (UTC) Oh, and last one out of me: WP:BLUDGEON. 02:13, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It's my good right to query contributions which are simply WP:ILIKEIT votes or don't make sense at all. Passing NOTSTATS is not a trump card to an article. In fact nobody quoted NOSTATS as a reason for deletion. There are other more pressing issued than that. Most importantly this essentially duplication.Tvx1 16:48, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * This is very trivial has little appeal beyond the Formula 1 fans. Unless my brain fails me, thats an ATA. The numbers that are used during the current season are always listed in the article for the current season and in the drivers' and constructors' articles. I assume in your rationale you are referring to the list topping up 2016 Formula One season? This list is for 2017 drivers. Your whole rational is filled with ATA. Every time you accuse us of ILIKEIT, it looks like you DONTLIKEIT.L3X1 (distant write)  18:55, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * You clearly don't know what we're discussing here. This list here is not dedicated to a particular season at all. There a couple drivers who don't drive in 2017 in it. And when I write current season, I mean current season. The current season is 2017, not 2016. Regardless it's duplication, all those numbers are already listed in the articles on the seasons during which these drivers drove.Tvx1 19:30, 18 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Direct quote The following lists all Formula One driver numbers currently claimed, as of the 2017 season: If there are drivers who don't drive in 2017, why are they on a current list? L3X1 (distant write)  20:04, 18 April 2017 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand DarjeelingTea (talk) 20:17, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Again, this is NOT a vote. Give a justified reason why it should be kept. Also read WP:ILIKEIT.Tvx1 22:26, 17 April 2017 (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.