Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of country subdivision flags in Africa (2nd nomination)


 * 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 draftify with protection‎__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. Barkeep49 (talk) 02:44, 21 July 2024 (UTC)

List of country subdivision flags in Africa
AfDs for this article:


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

Just closed to draftify and immediately recreated by the same editor. Thanks to the merged content it is no longer a G4, but none of the material added addresses the issues raised at Articles for deletion/List of country subdivision flags in Africa. If this closes as draftify or delete, suggest protection to avoid this situation again. Star  Mississippi  23:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions.  Star   Mississippi  23:47, 26 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Shellwood (talk) 23:50, 26 June 2024 (UTC)


 * The title is "flags of country subdivisions of Africa", and what is shown are the flags of country subdivisions of Africa. By draftifying it, you are removing a whole list of flags that some people may find useful. Eehuiio (talk) 02:14, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * This page is not a gallery anymore, I converted into informative tables. I hope this will help 2A02:A453:D05E:0:7859:2E95:3DE6:2A4A (talk) 11:18, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * It remains un sourced, which is the chief issue. Please log in when you edit. Star   Mississippi  13:24, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * many sources have been added now. This should not be deleted. Eehuiio (talk) 16:28, 27 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Please review sourcing guidelines. fotw.info is not an acceptable source, nor are many of the others. This is why it remains functionally unsourced. Star   Mississippi  13:00, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
 * Even if it is unsourced, it still has information that fits the title. Deleting it would be useless and unnecessary. Eehuiio (talk) 19:51, 28 June 2024 (UTC)


 * Draftify over current draft with historymerge (the current list article at least looks better)., as Star Mississippi notes, neither fotw.info nor crwflags.com nor others are reliable sources. For the purpose of this list's entries, I believe official government sources would be reasonable to use despite not necessarily being independent. The alternative is that every entry that is not reliably sourced is removed/commented out per WP:V/WP:BURDEN, which would remove most content from this article; historymerge would be needed in this case anyway. If this is moved to draft, then please put it through the Articles for Creation process per the AFC template once you believe that the flags are properly sourced; please don't move this back to mainspace in a deficient state where it is likely to be speedily deleted, etc. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 01:47, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * This page also has other sources, so it isnt completely unsourced. Also, it still fulfills the title and is useful. Eehuiio (talk) 02:35, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * post-relisting, confirm my draftification !vote, ref per comments of BD2412, etc. If it's fixed in draft and sent through AFC, then good. If it's left unfixed then so be it. If it's moved back to somewhere in mainspace in a deficient form (yes, protect away), then consider that a WP:G4 with broad latitude ref this AFD. ~Hydronium~Hydroxide~(Talk)~ 14:48, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Relisting comment: Draftify or delete? Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CycloneYoris talk! 07:40, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Nominator commentyes, the reopening was Involved, but I do not believe that is an issue as it's clearly not a discussion for a NAC. Cleaning up redirects now Star   Mississippi  14:45, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * I think we're all tired of whack a sock. @Eehuiio if you run into issues editing here, just remember to log in first. This has nothing to do with your edits. I've protected against logged out edits. If any admin thinks this is Involved, feel free to revert me. Star   Mississippi  18:56, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete: and salt. Draftification makes sense when an editor editors familiar with our notability guidelines offers are available to work on the article. Draftification makes no sense when a single-purpose account cares more about having their pet page on WP than they do about any P&G. If we draftify this again, it'll bounce right back to mainspace as soon as we turn our head away, and we'll be back here in a couple of weeks for the 3rd nomination. Salting in this case is only meant to force the author to go throuigh AfC. Owen&times; &#9742;  21:54, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Delete The rationale by Own makes sense to me and as a NP patroller I am frustrated when an editor ignores process. Lightburst (talk) 01:53, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify. Move-lock the draft and create-lock the page. The draft will either be worked on in draftspace or die on the vine. Deletion should be reserved for cases where we should never have such an article. BD2412  T 21:16, 4 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Draftify: I agree with that the page should be SALTed until the draft is accepted at AfC. I also believe that a comment to that effect, with a link to this discussion, should be added to the draft for the benefit of AfC reviewers. I disagree with  that Draftification makes sense when an editor familiar with our notability guidelines offers to work on the article. Anyone can edit a draft in the draftspace. As a result of this AfD, there will also now be likelly be a set of eyes on the draft. Someone could also agree to work with the author. Edited 23:03, 5 July 2024 (UTC).  I also disagree with the contention that Draftification makes no sense when a single-purpose account cares more about having their pet page on WP than they do about any P&G. Draftification is actually the best way to force that editor to try to learn those P&Gs so that they can get the article through AfC. I share 's frustrat[ion] when an editor ignores process, but I do not believe that it is a valid reason to delete an article. voorts (talk/contributions) 02:05, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * You make some good points,, and I partially amended my !vote above accordingly. Yes, drafts are available for everyone to work on, and this AfD may very well bring more attention to the page. But while the AfC process was indeed intended to teach editors our P&G, the ability to move drafts into mainspace without going through AfC effectively negates that objective, allowing a SPA to circumvent the process. I'd gladly undelete the page to draft if a non-SPA requests it, or even history-merge with a new draft. But realistically, I doubt anyone but the original author has any interest in this page. I agree with BD2412's statement that Deletion should be reserved for cases where we should never have such an article, but contend that this is exactly the case here, where sources do not establish notability, and the only one requesting a draft is an editor who doesn't seem concerned with our notability guidelines, and is simply waiting for an opportune moment to sneak the page back to mainspace. Owen&times; &#9742;  12:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Just a quick side note. Flags of regions of Egypt is completely unsourced. The absence of sourcing in the nominated article revealed that, and if the latter article were fixed, it could transclude into this one as is. BD2412  T 21:23, 5 July 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, The Herald (Benison) (talk) 18:35, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep This article it is a part of the List of country subdivision flags, which is split into continents due to its size. If this article were deleted, this makes the list of country subdivision flags incomplete, while this is useless to readers. I'm converting from galleries to tables with reliable sources. 2A02:A453:D05E:0:8431:8C89:A5D1:202C (talk) 10:58, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
 *  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.


 * 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.