Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 00:34, 13 January 2020

List of Baptist churches in Leicester

New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

• How to contribute
• Introduction to deletion process
• Guide to deletion (glossary)
• Help, my article got nominated for deletion!

List of Baptist churches in Leicester (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

A list with no notable entries, with little evidence of the topic being notable itself (emphasis on the "churches", not "Baptists in Leicester"). The list does not seriously fulfill any of the three purposes of WP:LISTPURP. — MarkH₂₁ 08:17, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Christianity-related deletion discussions. — MarkH₂₁ 08:17, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. — MarkH₂₁ 08:17, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. — MarkH₂₁ 08:18, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. — MarkH₂₁ 08:18, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

• Delete We are not a directory of all churches in (or no longer in) existence. Reywas92 21:42, 12 January 2020 (UTC)
• Keep Certainly fulfills the first statement made in WP:LISTPURP:The list may be a valuable information source. This is particularly the case for a structured list. Examples would include lists organized chronologically, grouped by theme, or annotated lists. Article may be Misplaced Pages:UGLY, but Misplaced Pages:Deletion is not cleanup and should be improved.Djflem (talk) 22:32, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

It really doesn’t, except in the capacity as a directory which Misplaced Pages is not. — MarkH₂₁ 22:36, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

WP:CSC Common selection criteria states: Lists are commonly written to satisfy one of the following sets of criteria:

Every entry in the list fails the notability criteria. These lists are created explicitly because most or all of the listed items do not warrant independent articles: for example, List of Dilbert characters or List of paracetamol brand names. Such lists are almost always better placed within the context of an article on their "parent" topic. Before creating a stand-alone list consider carefully whether such lists would be better placed within a parent article.

So, as per the nominator mention on "no notable churches" and the criteria stated in policy, this would be keep.Djflem (talk) 22:44, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

That guideline literally suggests that you not create a list in the first place, but use a parent article (i.e. Baptists in Leicester or a prose Baptist churches in Leicester). — MarkH₂₁ 22:53, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

And it literally gives two examples where it suggests lists that do fit the criteria, of which there are many, which is clearly a positive use of Misplaced Pages:Other stuff exists.23:31, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Two examples which provide detailed non-directory information, unlike this article. I don’t see your point with the essay that remarks, just pointing out that an article on a similar subject exists does not prove that the article in question should also exist.Are you going to continue copying every comment from Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Congregational Churches in Leicester to here even after I respond to them over there? — MarkH₂₁ 23:42, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I am following your lead about copying & doing exactly as you are with regard to that AfD, which is a similar, but different AFD. It's about the AfD not about you. I mentioned the essay because it says: comparisons are important as the encyclopedia should be consistent in the content that it provides or excludes. The two provided in the guideline are very good existing examples of annotated lists, which this has the potential to be. It is very clear Misplaced Pages:Deletion is not cleanup and that issue here is Misplaced Pages:SURMOUNTABLE — Preceding unsigned comment added by Djflem (talk • contribs)

Sure, but not acknowledging the responses when reposting comments suggests that you are ignoring or dismissing the responses.Then draftify it and work on it. You’re applying essays on wiki philosophies, whereas notability guidelines and WP:NOT policies suggest that the list article shouldn’t exist. — MarkH₂₁ 00:17, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm not ignoring or dismissing, I'm contesting the arguments being put forth and providing links and insight guidelines and policies that suggest this list should exist. Therefore, I quote the specific part of it, rather than just add a link. Can you address them and/or do the same? Doing so can make the discussion more productive.Djflem (talk) 00:34, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

• Delete. Yet another directory of non-notable churches in one particular British city. Ajf773 (talk) 23:58, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

• AfD debates (Places and transportation)
• AfD debates