Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Skateboarding brands (2nd nomination)


 * 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 keep. John254 00:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Skateboarding brands
AfDs for this article: 
 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

This is pure listcruft - a list for a list's sake - 90% redlinks, serves no encyclopedic purpose. ukexpat (talk) 17:51, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Actually I disagree. The existing links actually take the user to articles which (in most cases), contain a decent chunk of information. Pictures even in some occasions! Removing the article in question would make it extreemely hard for viewers to find their desired brand. Although I admit, first the brand in question would actually need an article! Also seeing as sections 1.1, 1.1.1 and 1.5 have a decent amount of internal links, I change my stance. Keep this article.  A Prodigy   ~In Pursuit of Perfection ~ 19:10, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep. No reasonable argument has been advanced for deletion.  Redlinks are how the encyclopedia grows; many of the redlinks here point to articles that Wikipedia should have, but doesn't.  -- Dominus (talk) 19:35, 28 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Keep - Though shouldn't it be called List of skateboarding brands? Ostap 03:09, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - passed AFD only a few months ago and articles that pass with Keep decisions should not be repeatedly nominated in such a short period of time. The renaming suggestion in the previous AFD should be implimented. 23skidoo (talk) 13:16, 29 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Keep - I don't really see any difference from this article's last AfD until today. The decision made in the last AfD back in April would basically be the same now, IMO. Also, just because an article has many red links, doesn't make that a delete rationale. WP:REDLINKS shows exactly what to do when there are red links in an article: Create them! Red links show that there is an article not yet created, but editors can create it. There's no such policy that states that articles with too many red links should be deleted. If a notable article was to be deleted, and it had many red links in it, it would actually hurt Wikipedia for 1) deletion of a perfectly notable article, and 2) the red links that could lead to the creation of them are now gone (assuming that the red links were about notable subjects) and the chances of the red links being created by editors drop. -- RyRy  ( talk ) 16:35, 30 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.