Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of cultural festivals in Indian colleges


 * 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   no consensus. Despite being listed for three weeks, there's no real consensus here. It looks like there are some reasonable suggestions for merging, but that can be worked out on the aritcle's talk page without the formal AfD process. -- RoySmith (talk) 15:06, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

List of cultural festivals in Indian colleges

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

I believe this list fails the notability requirement for lists described at WP:LISTN, namely "One accepted reason why a list topic is considered notable is if it has been discussed as a group or set by independent reliable sources". AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 14:06, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:05, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Note that LISTN says "One accepted reason..." You always should explain why you think LISTN is the best way to analyze the list. And I don't think it's relevant here, because (I'm surprised to see that) we have many articles on these festivals. So this appears to be an index of notable topics satisfying WP:LISTPURP, complementary to Category:College festivals in India per WP:CLN. If we have enough articles of a certain type, then absent a compelling reason not to we're going to list them together (see also intro to WP:NOTDIR). As a side note, it looks like there's some confusing redundancy in the categorization, as Category:Culfests is presently a subcategory of Category:College festivals in India despite that being what a "Culfest" is, as explained at Cultural Festival (India) (where Culfest redirects). Which also means that Cultural Festival (India) is the proper parent article, which should be merged to this list (or this list merged there) given how short that article is. And then whatever category we end up with should be renamed to match that article title (or the article title renamed if the category title is better). It's also possible that we shouldn't have all these articles if the festivals are not all independently notable, but that should be dealt with on a case-by-case basis prior to deleting this list or the category. Follow all that? ; ) postdlf (talk) 17:20, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Dusti*Let's talk!* 06:24, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment I don't see the reason why it should be deleted, have you thought of redirect or merge? Bladesmulti (talk) 08:59, 29 December 2014 (UTC)


 * Comment In response to 's comments above, I failed to mention that as well as my quote from LISTN, I also brought this list to AFD because I believed that most of the festivals listed are not independently notable, based on a preliminary observation that there are far many more redlinks/nolinks than there are blue links. I have now done a survey of the contents of the list. By my count, there are currently 93 festivals listed and there are 32 blue links; 24 are stand-alone articles and 8 are links to a section in the relevant school's article. Of the 24 articles, 7 have no references at all (4 of them tagged, 3 not tagged), and 9 have insufficient references (3 of them tagged, the others my opinion based on links to blogs, the school's own website, etc.). That leaves only 8 articles with references to proper third party sources. I haven't looked at any of those references in further detail, but judging by some of the titles some may be little more than passing mention. In short, if all of these articles were put to AFD, I think the survival rate would be pretty low. However, it seems I have put the cart before the horse by nominating the list first. As for Bladesmulti's suggestion, it could be merged into the Cultural Festival (India) page that Postdlf has mentioned. Other issues would also have to be addressed such as what criteria would be required for addition to the list. Right now it appears to be a free-for-all. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 06:08, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I see how you have researched. Merging to Cultural Festival (India) will work. Bladesmulti (talk) 13:50, 5 January 2015 (UTC)

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

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 13:15, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Keep per WP:CSC. VMS Mosaic (talk) 02:10, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Which part of WP:CSC are you referring to? There are three different criteria there. I think it fails the first, as even the bluelinks have veribility problems that I have described above, let alone the red links. Arguing for the second or third options could be awfully dangerous, bearing in mind that according to Higher education in India there are up to 33,000 colleges that could potentially be eligible for the list.
 * In fact, the final paragraph of WP:CSC - "Creation guide" lists—lists devoted to a large number of redlinked (unwritten) articles—don't belong in the main namespace. - provides a reason for deletion. AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 04:49, 6 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Well, if you are correct in your argument here that none of them is notable, then obviously #2. If you are wrong in your argument, then #1. I would have no issue with Merge other than if a lot of other stuff gets merged, then WP:TOOLONG may come into play. VMS Mosaic (talk) 05:13, 6 January 2015 (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.