Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Swedish Swimming Championships champions


 * 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 Fram 11:26, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

List of Swedish Swimming Championships champions

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Was prodded as "no context, encyclopedic". I felt it could use some discussion, so I carried it to AfD. There already appears to be relevant categories. Procedural nom, no opinion.UsaSatsui 03:03, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

The page has been split off into two sub-pages, those pages are being listed here:

--UsaSatsui 12:27, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep The winners of national swimming titles are obviously notable sportsmen and women and this is linked to the article on the championships themselves. It's too large to be a part of that one though.  The red links in a list allow editors to see which competitors currently lack an article, this is why they're better than categories.  It also allows readers to see the years in which various people won, again something which categories can't do.  If this goes we could always delete List of Super Bowl champions next.  Nick mallory 05:24, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - seems like a notable enough subject to me. Gatoclass 06:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Other - Move to List of Swedish Swimming Championships champions (men) and List of Swedish Swimming Championships champions (women)? // S MARTSKAFT | &iquest; 07:41, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I did. // S MARTSKAFT | &iquest; 10:56, 9 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Weak delete, despite the list containing many notable names, national championships in individual sports are generally not notable, and not supported by WP:BIO. Punkmorten 08:37, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * WP:BIO says that sports people have to have competed at the highest level in their sport or in a fully professional league. I fail to see how being a national champion in a swimming event doesn't pass this hurdle.  Nick mallory 11:07, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Apart from which, this is not a WP:BIO article anyway, it's a list of national champions with links where appropriate to those who do qualify for their own article under WP:BIO. Gatoclass 21:31, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep - seems like a notable enough subject to me. I find the lists encyclopedic and necessary. What is the problem? ♦ Sir Blofeld ♦     "Talk"? 09:15, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Keep Serves as a guide for navigation and is to long and unwieldy to live elsewhere. Notability is ok, but possibly some redlinks may need to be pruned. Pedro | Chat  11:02, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * The redlinks need to be 'pruned' by being turned into blue links by having articles written about them. Are you suggesting deleting random events from random years because no such article has been written yet?  That seems to defeat the whole point of wikipedia, and indeed of an encyclopedia. Nick mallory 11:09, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Sorry Nick, let me make that clearer. Clearly where someone in this list is notable then the red-link should remain and an article created. My concern was that some of the red-links may be non-notable people - One can't assumme de facto that being a Swedish Swimming Champion makes you notable (or though it would seem to make it fairly certain) - this is why is said "possibly". In addition one can't assume that we would be able to verify the notability (although again it would seem likely) My take on this is that if a list is in Wikipedia because it is better than using a category then in general the fewer red links the better. Resolving this by adding notable and verifiable content is the best way to remove red-links, of course. Pedro | Chat  11:53, 6 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Neutral - (Could be a Keep with changes) When I first tagged this article the 2-sentence lead did not exist. I believe Wikipedia lists should have a lead paragraph telling the reader why the list is notable, explaining the categories (in this case perhaps a brief description of the strokes with wikilinks to articles about the strokes), some discussion about who can compete (is this amateur or professional?), and a sentence about what sources were used to compile the list.  A list of names and years by itself is not encyclopedic.  The addition of the "lead" as of today is a slight improvement, but I think the items I mentioned should be minimum requirements for a List article.--Appraiser 13:25, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * You could always add such a lead yourself. Not everyone who starts an article on wikipedia knows as much about its norms as you.  As the AfD page says, an attempt to research and fix an article should be made before asking it to be deleted. Nick mallory 00:46, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
 * I've added some, and some humor - plus fixed the dates. Please correct anything I said about swimming that is incorrect.--Appraiser 03:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Keep. A valuable indexing page that provides both links to athletes, all of whom are presumptively notable by WP:BIO.  Redlinks are there to provide suggestions for future editors. - Smerdis of Tlön 14:05, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Ugh. I'd rather see this broken down into individual articles on each Championship, with a list of the winners in each article, but this is what we have.  It's ugly, but it's encyclopedic.  Weak keep, holding my nose.  Corvus cornix 18:50, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletions.   -- John Vandenberg 00:13, 10 September 2007 (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.