Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Turf Club members


 * 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 merge to Turf Club (gentlemen's club).  Sandstein  12:43, 30 June 2019 (UTC)

List of Turf Club members

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Fails WP:GNG and WP:NOTDIRECTORY. List does not have any notability Rogermx (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. Rogermx (talk) 21:33, 15 June 2019 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus. Relisting comment: The deletion rationales so far need some work
 * Delete per nominator. None of the names appear notable. Ajf773 (talk) 21:39, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Completely unsourced list of people who may or may not be notable. Adds nothing of value to the encyclopedia. -- MelanieN (talk) 19:10, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Comment. What I'd hope to see here is discussion rooted in some understanding of the subject, and what the informational value may be to that parent topic of listing its members, and consideration of whether merger may be a good option. Instead we have the following drive by comments: a WP:VAGUEWAVE nomination, a lazily inaccurate observation (actually, most of the names are notable) that was apparently based on nothing more than the lack of wikilinking in the list at the time rather than any actual research, and a complaint based on current sourcing rather than its potential. So while there may be a substantive deletion rationale for this list, it hasn't been presented yet. postdlf (talk) 21:37, 22 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I concede that some of the names on the list are notable, but it escapes me as to why their belonging to this club is notable. If this were a list of nobles who signed the Magna Carta or scientists who created the first atom bomb, that would be different. Instead, this was a bunch of aristocrats and politicians who went to a club to get away from their families, play some cards, and have a few drinks. Where is the notability?  Rogermx (talk) 14:52, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I don't understand your question, and I think the issue is the analysis you're trying to apply just isn't coherent here. This isn't an article on Turf Club membership of Alexander Fermor-Hesketh, 3rd Baron Hesketh, etc., so it simply isn't meangingful to ask whether their membership was "notable" (unless you mean something else by that other than "merits a standalone article"). The club is notable, and it has notable members, and that's as much as notability guidelines are of use here. We index articles by many kinds of shared facts, including by membership in notable organizations (see List of Skull and Bones members, for a good example, or Category:Members of organizations generally); I don't know if that's something that is also of merit to do here, because no one has yet presented an informed argument on that. Or if the list is viewed more just as a WP:SPLIT from the parent article, WP:SIZE would suggest we should just merge it. One thing that I'm curious about is whether membership is pretty much routine (or even automatic) for anyone of certain rank/title in the UK, which would suggest that a list even in the parent article would be pointless. In the meantime, I'm going to err on the side of merge to parent article, where those knowledgeable with the topic can determine the informational value of listing these there. postdlf (talk) 15:08, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, I could argue that the British Labour Party is notable and many of its members are notable. Should we then list all 512,000 members in a Wikipedia article?  A better idea is to merge a list of the notable Turf Club members into the Turf Club article.  Postdlf, thank you for your input and the interesting discussion.  Rogermx (talk) 19:58, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Delete Wikipedia isn't a directory. Or Merge' to Turf_Club_(gentlemen's_club) seems like both articles are short, so I think it's better to merge them together. Masum Reza 📞 03:14, 23 June 2019 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:25, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge since both articles are short enough for splitting to be unnecessary. FoxyGrampa75 (talk) 16:44, 23 June 2019 (UTC)
 * Merge The list could definitely be shortened and added to to Turf_Club_(gentlemen's_club). There is no obvious reason for it to have it's own entry as lot of the members listed do not meet WP:GNG. I would suggest narrowing it down to those that have their own pages to link to. Courtc22 (talk) 18:22, 26 June 2019 (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.