Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Timeline of three tallest structures in the world (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 delete.  Sandstein  22:05, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Timeline of three tallest structures in the world
AfDs for this article: 
 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Where to start. Unsourced since the turn of the decade and so impossible to check. The tallest structure is interesting but the second? The third? And if that why not the fourth or fifth?

The lengthy inclusion criterion is largely arbitrary, and is presumably editorial whim as there’s no source for it, making the lists subjective even if accurate. Accuracy is a particular problem the further back you go as it is presumably based on those still standing that can be measured.

And the formatting is badly broken. The laptop I am typing this on has a 1280 pixel wide screen but still cannot fit most of the third column in the top set. The combination of small blue text on saturated colours renders it at times unreadable. This can probably be improved but I’m not sure it can be fixed. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 23:37, 14 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions.  Human 3015   TALK    23:49, 14 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete. Nobody but a trivia junkie cares about anything other than the tallest over the course of time, and the titleholders are already covered in List of tallest buildings and structures in the world. Clarityfiend (talk) 01:35, 15 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. North America1000 21:18, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. The inclusion criteria certainly do seem a bit arbitrary.  I found this article at Smithsonian magazine, but it doesn't really give specifics, and it mostly just highlights how inclusion criteria can vary across groups that track these things.  According to them, one prominent group doesn't even count TV/radio towers at all.  As far as actual citations for the content, that's even more difficult.  I assume that it's out there, but I'm not finding it in my quick-and-dirty searches.  Most hits seem restricted to "it was at one point the tallest structure in the world" without giving any dates or specifics.  So, I'm not really sure what to say.  I guess it could just be deleted, but I suspect that a dedicated trivia fan could probably dig up a few sources.  I'll wait to see if any do. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 18:00, 16 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete. There is really no point in keeping this article. The topic hasn't been covered by reliable sources, so by necessity the creator put it together on his own. As others have pointed out before, the choice of the "top 3" structures and not the top 4, 5, 6, 7, etc. is quite arbitrary. By this logic, we could create an article on every single imaginable topic, which would be quite silly (Timeline of the lives of the top 4 oldest people, for example.) The important topic, List of tallest structures in the world, is already covered and the structures' individual timelines should also be discussed in their respective articles. As mentioned by nom, the article is also very poorly formatted and difficult to even understand as a result. -- Biblio worm  19:22, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete - material covered in other articles. Appears to be WP:LISTCRUFT.  Onel 5969  TT me 13:43, 22 October 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.