Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/McFarlane Sports Picks


 * 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. consensus clear enough after relisting   DGG ( talk ) 18:34, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

McFarlane Sports Picks

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

advertising The Banner talk 14:50, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * What a ridiculous and very long article. Reads like a product catalog. Delete -- Y not? 17:11, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Business-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:19, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:19, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:19, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
 * Weak Keep: An article being too long or not reading right are not reasons for deletion. And if it appears to be advertising, it can be changed. This should be the first protocol not AFD. Sources like this and this  and a general Google search do show these figures are highly collectable and popular. Thanks Marksterdam (talk) 18:54, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * Then good luck with rewriting of the article. The Banner talk 20:48, 29 December 2014 (UTC)
 * If there is consensus that the article should be changed then the first thing to do would be to ask the article creator I would suggest. That would be the civil/correct thing. Marksterdam (talk) 12:10, 30 December 2014 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NorthAmerica1000 04:31, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete, since it appears to be a big long directory of all the sets of all the sports action figures.  Aerospeed  (Talk) 04:38, 3 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment Please note that AFD is not a cleanup WP:AFDISNOTCLEANUP. A poorly written article is not reason for deletion. Nor is length. Please see: WP:PLENTY, if an article is too long it can be reduced. These are not valid arguments for deletion and I would suggest should be ignored by any closer. Thanks. Marksterdam (talk) 11:10, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * True, but this article reads like an advertisement. And that is why I nominated it, not the length or being poorly written. Just plain advertising. The Banner talk 11:12, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * Sorry my previous remark was addressed . To answer your point, the article does not strike my as advertising. Can you specify where the article does not comply with Neutral Point of View NPOV?


 * Why didn't you tag as such WP:ARTSPAM if this is your main criterion for deletion? This could also be a helpful step. Note also though that if the article content is notable, changing the article to a Neutral Point of View is preferable to delete WP:G11. As per my prior references and arguments I believe the subject is notable and does pass WP:GNG although barely, and so I would suggest there is no valid argument for deletion. Thanks. Marksterdam (talk) 11:44, 4 January 2015 (UTC)
 * My rationale for deletion was WP:NOTDIR. Although ARTSPAM could work too. Apologies for not linking the article earlier.  Aerospeed  (Talk) 04:11, 5 January 2015 (UTC)


 * DELETE WP:IINFO clearly indicates that large information dumps such as this need to go. Perhaps if there was some unique figurines that could justify notability, but as it stands it's a giant catalog of indiscriminate information. Hasteur (talk) 16:05, 13 January 2015 (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.