Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of sports by popularity by country


 * 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.  Sandstein  16:43, 13 August 2008 (UTC)

List of sports by popularity by country

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Delete. Article has no sources and breaches WP:RS. Clearly POV throughout and breaches WP:NPOV. Some of the assertions made are designed to make a WP:POINT about the perceived popularity of certain sports. Adds absolutely no value to the encyclopaedia. BlackJack | talk page 09:21, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete - in current form. If someone could find RS to support, I'd be happy for it to stay or return. As it happens, I disagree with some of the contentions in the article, and more fundamentally seek an answer to what constitutes "popularity"? Without that being sorted, the article is flawed to its core. --Dweller (talk) 09:49, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete - it looks to me like a list of countries by population, grouped into what sports 'seem' to be most popular, with no evidence of actual 'popularity'. No references, and an external link titled 'Some statistics'. –MDCollins (talk) 09:52, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete. No sources (the linked URL isn't really a source for the material on the page): at best WP:OR and quite possibly WP:POINT. Stephen Turner (Talk) 10:10, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Pure WP:POV and WP:OR Gnevin (talk) 11:17, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Strong delete POV, OR, making a point, etc... Andrew nixon (talk) 15:46, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom. Cliff smith  talk  16:30, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment I have reverted the article back to the version with reliable sources. Gary King ( talk ) 15:10, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment. The article has plenty of sources, now that a previous version has been restored. The article was a division/separation of content from National sport, as it was felt that the original combined article was confusing two separate issues. Now National sport focusses on sports defined as being national sports by legislation etc, whereas this article lists those that are most popular in individual countries. See this thread Talk:List_of_sports_by_popularity_by_country and those that follow. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 16:41, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Reply to comment the restored text was removed when National sport was created as the majority of it was unreliable and it's now out of place in the current article Gnevin (talk) 19:59, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * That's fine. I have no view either way. I was just bringing to the table information for the consideration of the person that has to decide this AfD. However, Gnevin, I will say one thing, as it must be pointed out. Given that it was you that removed all the references from the article when prior to that it had heaps of refs, I'd say your call above that it is "Pure WP:POV and WP:OR" is downright dishonest questionable. AlasdairGreen27 (talk) 22:06, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * The revision I replied to was which had no reference at all  and was the current revison of the article at the time . I don't know how that was downright dishonest or questionable or how you where assuming good faith Gnevin (talk) 10:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Gnevin's edit took out the section of official national sports which went to a new article. He did not take out the references for these tables as far as I can tell.  The section that Gnevin removed is unrelated.  Metros (talk) 22:32, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Looking at it again, I can see it being a bit related, but I believe it was done in good faith and was in no way trying to be dishonest. I don't think that that section should double as the reference section for those tables; those tables should be cited directly.  Metros (talk) 22:47, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. Difficult also to know why anyone would ever want to consult this as an "encyclopedic" article. Johnlp (talk) 20:03, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete Extremely difficult to understand and extremely biased. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lajolla2009 (talk • contribs) 22:24, 10 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Delete or rewrite There's trouble right off the bat, in that "popular" is left undefined. Speaking strictly from the U.S. perspective, the one site that it links to, a Gallup poll, doesn't show anything about this matter. For another, I would be shocked if soccer were anywhere near the popularity level of NASCAR, which is treated like an "etc." in this list. There's a lot more to popularity than a single poll that says what sport someone likes. There's also how much money is spent on a given sport. In fact, that's your true measure of popularity. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 02:19, 11 August 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.