Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries by forest area


 * 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The result was withdrawn--Ymblanter (talk) 07:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

List of countries by forest area

 * – ( View AfD View log | edits since nomination)

Data now available at https://fra-data.fao.org/ so why bother copying it here in future years when that link could just be added to other articles? If anyone wants to make the effort to copy it it would make more sense to copy to Wikidata as researchers could then do queries on it. Chidgk1 (talk) 06:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Don't delete No reason. Aquatic Ambiance (talk) 07:31, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Not sure what you mean by "no reason". The reason I gave above is to save future work by editors like yourself. Chidgk1 (talk) 08:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 07:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Keep -- seems clearly notable, and provide visibility for an otherwise obscure data set living in another space -- Wikipedia platforms this kind of knowledge in a way the FAO cannot.Sadads (talk) 16:13, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Geography-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 19:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep. I don't see how the given reason for deletion is valid under the deletion policy (the point of WP is to collate data from reliable, secondary sources anyway; keeping one page updated is nothing compared to say updating every population figure every census) and the topic is notable (covered by an Our World in Data study and there is data from Global Forest Watch, for example). The latter even has slightly different figures from the FAO so it can be added as a second source. eviolite   (talk)  19:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Good idea to have a second source. For info - Wikidata allows for up to 3 values for a piece of data Chidgk1 (talk) 07:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep The fact that a list is available elsewhere does not seem like a valid reason for deletion. Presidentman talk · contribs (Talkback) 19:39, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep I agree with everyone else that this seems like a poor deletion rationale. The vast majority of things on Wikipedia are available elsewhere on the internet. Waddles 🗩 🖉 23:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep Utterly bullshit nomination. –LaundryPizza03 ( d c̄ ) 00:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Keep per above. Don't see a strong reason for deletion. Shankargb (talk) 02:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC)
 * OK you can obviously Close this as nobody agrees with me. Info for future editors But just in case anyone is thinking of requesting deletion in the future I just wanted to add the following info: 1) The approximate OWID map might be enough rather than these figures to an unbelievable number of decimal places. 2) Maybe one day listeriabot will be allowed to extract from Wikidata to English Wikipedia as it does to many other language Wikipedias. 3) I agree with the point above implying that a Wikipedia article is more likely to be at the top of a Google search, but Google also obviously searches within articles - so the map and link to FAO could be included in forest with a couple of sentences of text to explain. The map would likely be seen by more people then as obviously that article is more read. 4) This article is in 23 languages but is numerical - so it is not simply one update a year but 23 - if Wikidata was updated and extracted using listeriabot it would just be one update a year and could maybe be automated. Chidgk1 (talk) 07:41, 28 September 2022 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it.</b> 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.