Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people killed in bicycle-related accidents


 * 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 Delete -- JForget  01:44, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

List of people killed in bicycle-related accidents

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

Loosely defined and arbitrary list. If this were a list of people killed in motor vehicle collisions then the US alone would contribute around 35,000 names a year; no list of cyclist fatalities could ever be complete, the vast majority of cyclists who die (in as much as you can use the term "vast majority" to describe such a relatively small group) are not in any way notable, and most of the entries are uncited redlinks. And the "related" part is also problematic; to what extent must the relationship be established, I wonder? As an example of how problematic this list is, take Tom Simpson. Is his a bicycle-related accident? An accident of overdosing on performance enhancing drugs? Guy (Help!) 18:18, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep but maybe rename List of notable people killed in bicycle-related accidents. I think such lists are interesting. Just look at List of fatal, unprovoked shark attacks in the United States by decade! Kingturtle (talk) 18:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * There are a handful of fatal unprovoked shark attacks in the US every year. In the UK, there are around 150 cyclist fatalities annually, most of them completely unremarkable (i.e. the result of routine cluelessness, usually by a motorist).  The US has seen something over 44,000 cyclist deaths since 1932.  This list also mixes fatalities in competitive sport (akin to fatalities in motor racing racing) with non-race fatalities - the risk profiles are not in any way comparable. I believe it violates WP:NOT for these reasons. Guy (Help!) 18:26, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * It would be OR and POV by definition, who would decide which people are notable? WP:INTERESTING -- inherently subjective. Travellingcari (talk) 18:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * That's why we might consider adding the word notable to the article name. Kingturtle (talk) 18:33, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * and who decides who's notable enough to be included? NPOV who you say is notable might be completely irrelevant to others. Travellingcari (talk) 18:36, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Let's say anyone notable enough to have an article on Wikipedia. Kingturtle (talk) 18:39, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * and that's in a constant state of flux as articles get added, deleted, stay unreferenced for years... I don't think it's neutral enough to avoid NPOV etc. I'm with Compwhizii, category is better. Travellingcari (talk) 18:45, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * We don't add "notable" to lists - it's assumed that the entries are notable. There's a guideline somewhere, but I don't remember where it is. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * The barometer I suggested is the barometer used to determine whether names should be on the Birth and Death listings on day-of-the-year articles. (see: WikiProject Days of the year: "Only the births and deaths of people who are themselves subjects of Wikipedia articles should be listed.") Kingturtle (talk) 21:32, 6 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete and make category possibly?   Compwhiz II ( Talk )( Contribs )  18:35, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete; this is a list and an ill-thought out one. Richard Keatinge (talk) 19:15, 6 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete, agree, pointless list Beach drifter (talk) 20:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Pointless to you, but why take someone else's interest just because you don't see anything to it? Kingturtle (talk) 21:29, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Go with Compwhiz II's suggestion --Sf (talk) 20:10, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. Better as a category, and then only for pro cyclists. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:02, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete, but agree to make it a category, but not just for pro cyclists. --Pesco (talk) 00:38, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. I really don't understand why this article is under so much scrutiny. This article can be salvaged - which I think is what our work here is all about, finding ways to build articles. Kingturtle (talk) 01:32, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep The title means by implication, the list of notable people with articles in WP kiled in bicycle accidents. This is apparently not very many. It does more than a category by providing some orienting information about them. DGG (talk) 04:34, 7 February 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete As JzG says: WP:NOT Tomasrojo (talk) —Preceding comment was added at 10:20, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete I agree that "notable" in implied in the title, but this is entirely unsourced and better as a category. I don't like the "bicycle-related" which is too subjective - a bike zigs, a car zags to avoid it and hits a pedestrian instead? What if the driver says he was avoiding a bike? And what if the pedestrian is merely injured but his or her parents are killed while rushing to the hospital? Everything seems "related" to a bicycle. Why not Category:People killed while riding a bicycle and Category:People killed by bicycles if need be... Carlossuarez46 (talk) 01:14, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete as lacking definitional criteria. Minos P. Dautrieve (talk) 00:29, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
 * comment. rather than delete, can we find a way to save this article through renaming and clarifying? Kingturtle (talk) 01:36, 12 February 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.