Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of world records


 * 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 unanimous delete.  Singu larity  04:37, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

List of world records

 * – (View AfD) (View log)

As it currently stands this page is incomplete and largely unreferenced, whilst I don't think that this is a reason for deletion I do not thin that this page could ever be a good or complete article. It would have to be longer than the Guinness book of records and require almost constant updating over hundreds of pages of text. There are individual pages for certain notable records (such as List of Test cricket records) and I do not think it is neccessary to try and combine them all onto one page, possibly goes against WP:NOT. Guest9999 10:19, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per nom; I have no idea how anyone could think that a list containing every world record could work as an article. Propaniac 12:45, 8 August 2007 (UTC)


 * Delete per nom. It's obvious a lot of effort has gone into this article, but it already seems almost unmanageably long, and I imagine it's only going to get worse. The World Records category already exists. On the other hand, if it is deleted, where will information like the record for smallest origami frog go? --kateshortforbob 12:56, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete. Even though WP:ILIKEIT, it's a indiscriminate collection of info.  Unmaintainable and if it was completed, it would unacceptably long.  Useight 17:37, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per WP:NOT as mentioned above. This is what the Guinness book is for. ɑʀкʏɑɴ 19:08, 8 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete -- one page in a massively collaborative project of almost two million cannot hope to come close to Guinness in any meaningful sense. There just aren't enough people interested to make it worthy of Wikipedia's attention. Haikupoet 01:14, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Strong Delete There is a word for this, and it is called "plagiarism". "List of world records is an annotated list of world records organized by category."  I recognize a lot of these from Guinness... This appears to be a case of someone going through the Guinness book and picking out their favorite parts.  It's obvious a lot of effort has gone into this article, but not the type of effort that should be encouraged.  Mandsford 01:31, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete per list of loosely associated items - This is not the guiness book Corpx 04:15, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as way too vague in terms of criteria. And as noted above there are potential copyvio issues with Guinness. Also this article would require continuous maintenance and updating. 23skidoo 15:48, 9 August 2007 (UTC)
 * Delete as an editor to this page, it is high maintenance, non referenced, and is a habitat for continued vandalism. I also agree that this is what GWR does, and if anything can be considered a collection of miscellaneous data, which is against wiki policy. Maggott2000 01:24, 10 August 2007 (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.