Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Top Gear Races


 * 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. seicer &#x007C;  talk  &#x007C;  contribs  05:16, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Top Gear Races

 * ( [ delete] ) – (View AfD) (View log)

Please see Articles for deletion/Top Gear races. This was spun out of the main article but basic problems with sources remain. I'm not inclined to just G4 this so prefer to have a further discussion to try and drum up better sourcing. Otherwise, I think this would fail V, RS and N Spartaz Humbug! 00:24, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Delete: Wikipedia is not a sports Almanac, but rather an encyclopedia. South Bay (talk) 00:31, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment: a skim of the article is probably enough to reveal that it has little to do with sport... and much to do with television. —Sladen (talk) 08:59, 5 January 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions.   -- Raven1977 (talk) 03:56, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment. Some people are likely going to call for independent references, but since Top Gear is already notable, we don't need those to establish notability. Also, some believe episodes can be used to reference television program articles. Are the relevant Top Gear episodes available on DVD? If not, it's unlikely readers will be able to watch said episodes to verify the information (without resorting to piracy). - Mgm|(talk) 10:07, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually MGM, I think N is a real issue here because the question is whether these are separately notable to justify separate articles. For me, WP:UNDUE also comes into play as there is clearly no doucmentation to allow these to exist as external articles. They were spun out because they got too big so I'd wonder whether they actually should be trimmed and brought back into the article - otherwise the coverage is disproportionate to the actual real-world sourcing of the subject (i.e. none). That's partly why I didn't just G4 this as, if we end up merging then, we will need a protected redirect to preserve the history to comply with the GFDL. Just a thought anyway. Spartaz Humbug! 11:51, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Each race is already described with a bare minimum of words and only mentioning a couple while leaving out the majority of races would make the coverage incomplete and skew the perceived importance of the races that are covered (now THAT is undue weight). We have multiple television series that have long episode lists or even articles on single episodes. I don't see how spinning this particular topic off is any different from that. - Mgm|(talk) 08:50, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Merge a brief summary of the topic with Top Gear article. Kennedy  ( talk ) 13:15, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep and comment There's far too much information here to warrant merging into the main article or the challenges article therwise the articles would be too long. As someone above said, this article has nothing whatsoever to do with sport.  It's all to do with a significant feature of a popular british TV motoring magazine.  Maybe the article could be renamed 'List of Top Gear races' and then organised into tables, like what is done with the episode lists for numerous programmes.  After all, the article is effectively a series of lists.  As to what was said about the episodes being availible on DVD, I think the BBC only release certain episodes or compilations to DVD.  The races may appear on a Top gear challenges DVD if there is one (excluding the Richard Hammonds Top Gear stunt challenge interactive quiz DVD that came out before christmas) but otherwise, man of the episodes are repeated on Dave anyway. Looneyman (talk) 13:37, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - This series of races is one of the signature elements of this highly notable TV series. There is far too much information to support a merge. Raitchison (talk) 16:19, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep Notable, and too big to merge back into main article. Gandalf61 (talk) 17:04, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - as noted, this article was created in order to keep the main Top Gear article down to a manageable size. Deleting it would merely re-create the previous problem - as the bulk of the content would end up being added back to the main Top Gear article. DrFrench (talk) 18:58, 5 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Keep - As the argument has already been presented, a merge would make the main Top Gear article way too large, especially considering many of it's segments are given separate articles. ^_^ ^_^ (talk) 04:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Does anyone arguing to keepthis article have any sources to show that this is an independantly notable subject? Spartaz Humbug! 06:04, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Does it have to be? I seem to remember a guideline saying it's okay to split articles in such a way to keep it within a manageable size without having to establish notability for the new pages. Can't find it right now, so I might be wrong of course.. -- aktsu (t / c) 06:28, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, people apparently have no problem with separate discography-pages; couldn't the same reasoning used for creating those be applied here? -- aktsu (t / c) 06:56, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Also also; in any newspaper article about Top Gear I'm sure you'd find mention of (at least some of) the races. Would that be the coverage you're looking for to show that the races is an independently notable subject? There should at least be possible to find what WP:N calls "significant coverage" of some of them (though I'm only guessing here, haven't looked so might be wrong...), would that - if found - establish notability for the subject? -- aktsu (t / c) 07:09, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Comment, most recent one  1,000+ results.  —Sladen (talk) 10:59, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Most of those are not signification coverage though, just passing mentions. Found one some though (will be adding more if found):
 * Hammond races fighter jet in Top Gear stunt
 * Top Gear under fire again for racing stunt
 * Top Gear presenter in new high-speed stunt
 * Not completely sure about this as it's not available online: Jeremy gets into top gear at ss great Britain.
 * -- aktsu (t / c) 12:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Arctic race coverage in Daily Telegraph. Gandalf61 (talk) 12:21, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there's a lot about the arctic challenge, but as it has it's own page I'm ignoring all those. -- aktsu (t / c) 12:25, 6 January 2009 (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.