Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Steel blue


 * 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. Although most of the 'Keep' "votes" are weak (it is not obvious why we should have articles on all X11 colors if they are not discusses in sources) there is no consensus among other participants as to whether the article should be merged, redirected, or deleted. While further discussion at this AfD is unlikely to generate a clear consensus, discussions either at the articles talk page or a centralized discussion of how to handle less notable/poorly sourced X11 colors might be in productive. Eluchil404 (talk) 04:40, 4 October 2011 (UTC)

Steel blue

 * – ( View AfD View log )

A bunch of articles about colors, such as this one and the most of the ones linked in that AfD, were just deleted. This is an poorly-sourced (only source is a dictionary) stub about a non-notable color. It fails WP:GNG and I'd say that it might even be a WP:DICDEF. Slon02 (talk) 17:53, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Slon02 (talk) 17:56, 18 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete A vague dictionary definition of a color which would be better specified by Munsell color system or other standard notation. Such color names are arbitrarily applied by merchants to their products, with different merchants using different names for the same hue, value and chroma. Edison (talk) 20:43, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep I think there is virtue in having all the colors from a standard color chart, even if some individual colors are not so notable. I don't think there is an explicit policy based argument for this, so I will have to fall back to Wikipedia is not Paper and Ignore All Rules. Note that other X11 colors (such as Wheat (color)) were not deleted in recent AfDs. There is no consensus that they should be deleted. Francis Bond (talk) 07:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If a color isn't notable, it shouldn't have a separate article. The argument about Wikipedia not being paper is not appropriate, because that policy specifically states that all articles must still meet our guidelines for inclusion- including notability.--Slon02 (talk) 20:29, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Delete - No indication this colour is notable. -- Whpq (talk) 15:54, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Redirect to Variations of blue. Mark Arsten (talk) 21:21, 20 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Merge to Variations of blue. An X11 color. VMS Mosaic (talk) 02:46, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep All X11 colors should have articles in Wikipedia because they are widely used by web site designers. All X11 colors are notable.  Keraunos (talk) 03:54, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm still waiting to see some evidence that can establish that notability, at least for each specific color that was nominated. How are each one of them individually notable- how do they satisfy WP:GNG? If you have some policy that you'd like to use to counter that, be my guest.--Slon02 (talk) 16:42, 23 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep I agree that all X11 colors should have articles when there is sufficient information available. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 08:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.


 * Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks,  Rcsprinter  (talk)  20:43, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Keep - X11 colors, at least, should have articles. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:22, 2 October 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.