Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of libraries in Australia


 * 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__EXPECTED_UNCONNECTED_PAGE__. There is a consensus that the page should link or otherwise incorporate the sublists rather than be deleted, although there isn't a consensus on the exact process for this, which editors may attempt to take care of through either WP:BOLD editing or initiating a talk page discussion. signed,Rosguill talk 16:50, 28 May 2024 (UTC)

List of libraries in Australia

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

I have split the article into articles by state: List of libraries in Western Australia, List of libraries in Northern Territory, List of libraries in Australian Capital Territory, List of libraries in Tasmania, List of libraries in South Australia, List of libraries in Victoria, List of libraries in New South Wales, and List of libraries in Queensland. -- NotC hariza rd 🗨 18:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Museums and libraries and Lists.  -- NotC hariza rd  🗨 18:24, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions.  Spiderone (Talk to Spider) 18:39, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Procedural keep - no policy based rationale for !delete offered by nom. JMWt (talk) 18:45, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep but possibly rename to Lists of libraries in Australia and link to the per-province lists. Walsh90210 (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep -- I like @Walsh90210's approach. Dclemens1971 (talk) 20:08, 20 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep agree with above, there is no need to have both the main list and the state-level lists and thus the former should be a list of the state-level lists of Australian libraries. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 00:30, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Keep: I think a list of libraries in Australia meets WP:NLIST which says that stand-alone lists can be created of things/people that are notable as a group and individual things on the list do not need to be notable or have their own wikipedia article if the whole group is notable. I am sure that references can be found to show that Australian libraries as a group are notable, including the Indigenous knowledge libraries and the Mechanics Institute libraries as they are so uniquely related to Australia's history. Secondly, Australian GLAM (galleries, libraries and museums) employees and volunteers are very active and prolific contributors to Wikipedia and a list of Australian libraries will honour their contribution. I have looked at the comments on the list Talk pages and here and I think there could be more clean up of the list and it could be divided into State and Special libraries as suggested. I would also be willing to make improvements to the list and I know other librarian-editors who may want to make edits as well.LPascal (talk) 09:34, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I agree with this idea, thank you for the suggestion! -- NotC hariza rd  🗨 04:19, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Comment: I've been trying to work out how this list got marked for deletion. It seems to me that NotCharizard? thought it best to break the list into separate state library lists and then delete the main list? But now with all the comments and suggestions we may have all agreed to keep the one main list but structure it differently according to the Australian library system which has a national library, State libraries, local libraries under State governments, then special libraries which can be art libraries, science libraries, government department libraries, mechanics institutes, Indigenous libraries etc... If I am right, can someone (the original nominator for deletion?) please close the deletion discussion, so interested editors can help NotCharizard re-organise the main list and fill out the libraries? I don't want to start work on that main list of libraries if it's going to be deleted. LPascal (talk) 05:51, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't see the comments and suggestions saying to structure the list based on library categories? That's how it's done at the moment, but I haven't seen comments here saying that? It seems to consensus so far is to turn it into a list of lists? -- NotC hariza rd  🗨 06:36, 23 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Is is certainly a notable topic, the point is that the list was huge and still unfinished, so I split it into states and territory lists. Now the country one is a less complete duplicate. -- NotC hariza rd  🗨 06:39, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Have a look at List of Latin phrases (full) for a potential solution on how to handle this. Traumnovelle (talk) 20:30, 20 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Merge the state articles to the main article (if not fully duplicative) and then delete all the non-notable libraries – the generic local ones every community has and the ones every university has don't have to be listed unless there's actually an article. Reywas92Talk 01:54, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * This was my original plan also (for some states the list included every sub-branch of every library system, it was intense), but while going through the list I noticed that some quite big library systems that I think would defintely be notable enough for an article don't have one (I plan to begin drafting some soon), while smaller libraries that only just reach notability do. I am hoping that having the full list will encourage the creation of articles. -- NotC hariza rd  🗨 09:23, 21 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Keep - surely this not a valid afd target? per JMWt - and also comments by LPascale and Traumnovelle - JarrahTree 10:59, 21 May 2024 (UTC)
 * Based on it being a duplicate (although less complete) of the state and territory articles. Sorry for not specifying clearly. -- NotC hariza rd  🗨 06:42, 23 May 2024 (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.