Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of rowing blades - National team oars


 * 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. (non-admin closure) Logan Talk Contributions 07:00, 17 January 2011 (UTC)

List of rowing blades - National team oars

 * – ( View AfD View log )

Articles are just galleries of rowing oars. No prose content. Few, in any references. Wikipedia isn't a picture gallery. GrapedApe (talk) 16:39, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

 Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  D u s t i *poke* 00:33, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmmm I learned something looking at the pictures. Print encyclopedias often have this kind of picture galleries, for instance of flags of the world. In this case it seems like the best way to present the information. It is also good quality. Kitfoxxe (talk) 19:51, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment - Does Wikipedia define encyclopaedic content as having to be text based? Opbeith (talk) 22:45, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:39, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep but I will tag for references.  Sea photo Talk  01:11, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Delete - notability not established by independent reliable sources. Sure, it's information, and the format is somewhat useful, but the concern remains, is it notable? It doesn't appear to be. Had there been some sort of precedent from, say, something like a gallery of hockey jerseys (notability established through cultural significance, e.g. The Hockey Sweater), I might have said weak keep, but I see nothing of the sort. So I'm not convinced it's an appropriate list per WP:SALAT--70.80.234.196 (talk) 02:27, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep - Agreed that Wikipedia isn't a picture gallery. However, this is not simply a page full of pictures, it is a valuable reference for those interested in rowing. The blade colours, the clubs that row on a river are all valuable information. It is also not easy to find this information elsewhere. As for references, it's easy to reference them to British Rowing's site in the case of UK clubs, I'll do so at some point.--Teach46 (talk) 21:12, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * These lists of images are very incomplete and when made complete, they will be very large. I suggest the best place to list these images is elsewhere. For example the UK university examples are already shown in University rowing (UK) as small images against each entry in a list of clubs. I suggest that all could be handled in the same way and the need for these articles, which are either non-notable or only very marginally notable, would disappear. The images are also, mostly, from Commons and they are in categories there. There could be links from some articles to these Commons categories. So I go for delete. -- Bduke   (Discussion)  21:55, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Given that Rowing is an Olympic sport and blade designs are the standard way to identify boats and do not change often - unlike say Soccer or Rugby jerseys - this seems a perfectly reasonable article, though it needs better citations to verify the information. Note this is the list of National colours CF List_of_international_auto_racing_colors - not a list of club colours. Have those voting for delete parsed even the article title. So even as a dry bob I go for keep. Arachrah (talk) 13:45, 10 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Comment: List of international auto racing colors is much more than a gallery, it has text and multiple sources to establish notability. Now I would not be opposed to a merge of the galleries under AfD to appropriate articles, but so far I have seen nothing to suggest rowing blades designs are notable on their own.--70.80.234.196 (talk) 23:21, 11 January 2011 (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.