Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tombola (raffle)


 * 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. How to organize this topic area can continue to be discussed on the respective talk pages.  Sandstein  11:58, 9 December 2015 (UTC)

Tombola (raffle)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

Very poor article. Short, not very informative, can easily be merged back into its existing and previous place in the raffle article. No references. Rayman60 (talk) 00:46, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of United Kingdom-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Necrothesp (talk) 11:57, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand - needs a lot of work and better sources but it has potential. Artw (talk) 12:10, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete This is a content fork and does not have enough difference to stand aside from the current Raffle article. Google searches mostly bring up the BINGO company of the same name but nothing to help establish this as it's own notable subject to stand apart from raffle. Fails WP:GNG.McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 18:12, 1 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Rather than asking Google about "tombola", ask it about "tombola rules". De Guerre (talk) 00:11, 6 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Games-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 1 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep and translate - This article is a great candidate for a translation request from it:Tombola. De Guerre (talk) 00:04, 4 December 2015 (UTC)
 * ...which I just did. De Guerre (talk) 00:10, 4 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Keep and expand └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 20:09, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * Comment I am somewhat shocked at the experience of the editors voting keep here but do nothing to say why this topic is notable enough for an article on the English Wikipedia. Everyone needs to remember AFD is not a simple vote of keeps versus deletes. If you feel the article should be kept you need to prove how it meets the inclusion policies. A quick review of WP:DISCUSSAFD may help. So far almost all keep votes are nothing more then WP:ILIKEIT. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 21:00, 5 December 2015 (UTC)
 * In case it wasn't clear, the Italian article has more than enough to establish GNG. De Guerre (talk) 00:11, 6 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Maybe this is a cultural differences thing, tombolas are such a common & well understood concept here in the UK that I didn't feel the need to justify what I see as their inherent notability for inclusion in an encyclopedia, when offering my opinion above. You criticise doing "nothing to say why this topic is notable enough for an article on the English Wikipedia", but it wasn't clear to me from the original deletion rationale that notability was being questioned. The justification for deletion seems to be predicated on a criticism of the article's current contents, and a desire to see it merged back to Raffle. That's perfectly reasonable, but very much a personal opinion, and hence my "keep" justification was pretty short, containing my personal opinion that I'd sooner see the article kept, improved & expanded on as an article in it's own right. I don't really see your issue with that, this seems to my mind an appropriate use of AfD by all concerned. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 10:16, 6 December 2015 (UTC)


 * For the avoidance of doubt, let me expand upon my preference to keep this article. As I said in my comment above, tombolas are very common in the UK. Accordingly, there's plenty of UK-based resources available online around running a tombola , including places to buy or rent a tombola drum . You'll also find references to tombolas in mainstream British press    . As the article currently described, this seems to have a long Italian heritage  and as De Guerre has pointed out, there's plenty of scope to source material from the Italian article. So – I think as a concept this easily meets GNG, and there's enough potential that this deserves a separate article from Raffle which can be improved upon and expanded. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 10:29, 6 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment I've copyedited the text a bit, to tidy up, and to distinguish the UK & Italian variants of the game. Also added some images. └ UkPaolo/talk┐ 11:19, 6 December 2015 (UTC)


 * Merge to Bingo if we are talking about the content of the Italian article. The UK raffle lacks coverage and hence lacks notability, fails WP:GNG. --Bejnar (talk) 05:31, 9 December 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.