Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of awards and nominations 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. The Afd has a majority of delete !votes. The keep !votes, significantly, acknowledge that the list is apparently better as a portal. Considering that the keep !votes numerically are close to half of delete !votes, and considering the supporting arguments, I'm currently deleting these list. However, in case someone wishes to start a new portal with the current contents, I can give the deleted data on request. Thanks.  Wifione  Message 13:39, 21 January 2013 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations articles

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Unnecessary list, does nothing that a category can't. Deprodded by author for no reason. Ten Pound Hammer • (What did I screw up now?) 08:44, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Comment Actually, in response to the prodding of List of fastest-selling products, and many other articles simultaneously, I responded: "[This article should be AFD'd instead] because I think...this article, like the other articles which you have prodded for deletion, are not worthy of deletion, and rather than argue with you one on one I think a community discussion would be much more fruitful... especially in regard to the directory-type articles - a new form of article that many editors showed their support for at one of the AFD discussions". I deprodded the article as that action had not been taken, and I did not want to see the article prematurely deleted. See Articles for deletion/List of criticism and critique articles for further discussion on these types of articles.--Coin945 (talk) 09:01, 31 December 2012 (UTC)


 * delete indiscriminate list - Nabla (talk) 02:08, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep as creator and as a useful navigation article. It is discrete as it has a clearly defined boundary, and is very useful for analysing the varying quality of different Wikipedia articles that share a common thread.--Coin945 (talk) 03:20, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:54, 4 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, — Theopolisme ( talk )  23:40, 6 January 2013 (UTC)




 * Delete We don't need an index for loosely-connected Wikipedia articles. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 00:37, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Comment Isn't this the perfect time to discuss consensus for naming of these types of articles? You've seen the list. You've seen the many different naming anomalies.... Thoughts?--Coin945 (talk) 05:41, 7 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete Far too self-referential. Is it a notable phenomenon that Wikipedia has many such articles? Has it been prominently discussed outwith the project? As for the article's usefulness I refer you to WP:LISTPURP: "However, as Wikipedia is optimized for readers over editors, any lists which exist primarily for development or maintenance purposes (such as a list that consists primarily of red links) should be in project or user space, not the main space." Rubiscous (talk) 01:25, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Following a discussion with the article's creator at another AfD I realise I should have said Move to Portal:Awards and Nominations. The WP:SELF issue I mentioned above only applies to the article space (as do my arguments on the other AfD based on not passing WP:GNG which would also be relevant here), this list would make a good basis for a portal. Rubiscous (talk) 05:17, 17 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Keep, but   we need to find a better wording: its more a portal of a nav feature than an article. The concept of having something to do this function  is correct, however  DGG ( talk ) 04:09, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Keep as a top-level navigation page. All the articles on the list are notable in their own right too.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 09:58, 13 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete - The articles are already there and easy to find. This list appears to be superfluous.--Zananiri (talk) 14:50, 13 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  MBisanz  talk 01:02, 14 January 2013 (UTC)




 * Keep - It is doing no harm and may help. At WP:MOS/Lists see "Redundancy of lists and categories is beneficial because the two formats work together". More in depth explanation at Categories, lists, and navigation templates. I agree with DGG, this is more like a portal. Maybe we need to add "Portal pages" to Categories, lists and nav templates?  David_FLXD  (Talk) 03:54, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Note This article is one of a series that have all received AFD's. Feel free to check out those other AFD discussions. Some of the articles may have already been deleted.
 * List of comparison articles
 * List of bibliography lists
 * List of controversy articles
 * List of criticism and critique articles--Coin945 (talk) 06:27, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete This might work as a category, but a page isn't necessary. — Ed! (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2013 (UTC)
 * WP:CLN.  Lugnuts  Dick Laurent is dead 19:05, 14 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete I agree that a category would work better. Jucchan (talk) 23:51, 16 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Delete Too indiscriminate. It would be like having a list of sports championships and listing every Super Bowl, World Series, NBA title and Stanley Cup championship on the same page. The list is far to expansive to make searching through it meaningful. The category Category:Lists of awards by award winner seems a far more valuable place to sort through and locate these types of various lists. -- Star cheers peaks news lost wars Talk to me 23:27, 19 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Delete. On Wikipedia, we have this thing, called a category. Yeah... — Statυs  ( talk,  contribs ) 13:56, 20 January 2013 (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.