Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Topo (climbing)


 * 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 speedy keep. (non-admin closure) Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 12 September 2017 (UTC) ===Topo (climbing)===


 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

This definition of a term of art for a particular sport has been unreferenced for six years as a short article. PROD was removed without improvement. It could be a wiktionary entry or a paragraph in another climbing article. It does not warrant its own article. It had its chance. Rhadow (talk) 17:49, 11 September 2017 (UTC) References added. Rhadow (talk) 00:38, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep The page seems to be doing ok as it is and WP:NOEFFORT is not a reason to delete as we have no deadline. It seems that the nomination is a drive-by made without any due diligence or consideration of alternatives per WP:BEFORE. AfD is not cleanup. Andrew D. (talk) 18:05, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep or merge. With a 5-minute WP:BEFORE style search, I was able to locate two books talking about this kind of map and added them to the article. There are other refs that discuss these diagrams and various groups like SuperTopo, dedicated to creating topos. Hence there seems adequate sourcing out there for this topic. Topos are usually a part of a climbing guide, so a merge to Climbing guidebook would also be reasonable. But outright deletion of verifiable material is the wrong course of action per WP:ATD and WP:PRESERVE. --Mark viking (talk) 18:54, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Visual arts-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:05, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:05, 11 September 2017 (UTC)


 * so are you withdrawing this? Shawn in Montreal (talk) 00:50, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Based on this reply on my user talk page, the nominator seems to have side-stepped the question of whether he actually wishes to withdraw this, but we no longer have a nomination rationale that calls for it to be deleted so criterion 1 of WP:SKCRIT would seem to apply. I'm closing this. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:14, 12 September 2017 (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.