Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of countries in chronological order of achieving statehood


 * 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.  Syn  ergy 01:34, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

List of countries in chronological order of achieving statehood

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This article has the same aim and theme as List of sovereign states by formation date which has had several copies before. A consencus should be reached on one article. We should not have one article for each opinion on this subject. Inge (talk) 15:44, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.   — Cliff smith  talk  16:51, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep I think this is what List of sovereign states by formation date should have been. This list actually does list the nations "by formation date", and does so in a plausible fashion.  Certainly, this is not a case of one list being similar to the other, but rather the information being presented differently.  To some extent, different arrangements of the same data is tolerable, particularly on core subjects such as information about the nations of the world.  The "other" list is arranged geographically, while this list is arranged historically.  I think the older list is misnamed, but that by itself is not a reason to delete one and keep the other.  Mandsford (talk) 16:27, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep This is a worthwhile list, although it may not be perfect and complete. Northwestgnome (talk) 17:51, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. There seems to be nothing wrong with that list as such, this merging issue should not be handled through AfD. Equendil Talk 18:20, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The difference between the two lists isn't one of point of views but of seemingly unreconcilable formats. The problem is of a technical nature: how to present data sorted and grouped according to multiple criteria. Having two lists presenting the same data in different ways is, in essence, a technical solution (albeit a bad one, as data is duplicated). Equendil Talk 18:33, 11 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment Because of a revert war, this is not a single article but two different articles. Depending on which one is current when you view it, you might come to different conclusions. A recent example of what I'll call the IP article is here and an example of what I'll call the Alternative article is here. I know that AfD is not the place to settle revert wars, but I do ask people to be aware of that when you express an opinion about the article it's important to say which version you mean. Also, there's information on the discussion page that people may find relevant. Fg2 (talk) 21:36, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep Since the same info is presented in two different format, I think we should keep this list. Agree with the above editor that the merging issue should not be handled through AFD.— Chris!  c t 23:18, 11 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. This one actually lists states chronologically, unlike the other one which only claims to in its title. More importantly, this list includes states no longer existent/independent today, something of great historical importance. LordAmeth (talk) 14:25, 12 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep This is very similar to List of sovereign states by formation date, but does, as has been noted, list by date and includes soverign states which no longer exist. Unfortunately, it's also subject to vastly erroneous edits by various IPs. Ideally, this should be merged with List of sovereign states by formation date, such that the data may be sorted either alphabetically or chronologically, and still including ex-states. --Cooper-42 (talk) 14:33, 12 September 2008 (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.