Talk:List of hobbies

Speedy delition

When I created this page, I had no idea that a page with this title had been deleted before. Once this box above popped up that said it had been previously deleted, I had no access to the old version to see what it had on it. Too bad I put so much time into this before I had the opportunity to read the previous deletion discussion, which I had no clue where to find. Having said that, I have a couple of questions:

1. The arguement is that this is not encyclopedic. I have read (and used) many lists on Wikipedia that look just like this one. Can anyone explain to me what is an encyclopedic list and what's the difference between that and list that is not encyclopedic, or at least give me the location of this info?
2. Since this is being nominated for deletion the second time, is there no discussion? I can't find where that is if there is. I suppose what I am writing will be deleted before anyone reads it anyway.

Having read the discussion of the previous page deletion I have the following to say:

1. I created this list with the anticipation that it would eventually grow into a large list that (before it became unmanageable) could be logically divided into a number of smaller useful lists that this page would refer to, as it already does refer to a number of other related lists.
2. My plan for the near future was to add references to each list item to provide evidence of relevance as to why it is on this list, like I have started doing with [List of collectibles]. This makes sense to me, and provides a method to keep the list manageable. (Now I am afraid to waste time by continuing to work on [List of Collectibles], which by the way I didn't create, because I am worried that by mentioning it here, it will be lumped into the same logic as [List of hobbies] and get a nomination for deletion too.)
3. If you take a look at the [Category:Hobbies] page, you can plainly see that it is no substitute for a list of hobbies, because there is no stucture to it other than alphabetical. At least [List of hobbies] is well organized and can be (and has been for me) a useful tool to get to information on Wikipedia. That is generally why I have used lists on Wikipedia in the past. Maybe someone can explain to me why my thinking is so bad.

If you happened to read this before it got deleted, thank you for your time and consideration. Best Regards, Jeffrey Scott Maxwell (talk) 23:37, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

The article isn't currently tagged for speedy deletion. I've posted to your talk page to try to explain the situation. Calathan (talk) 01:10, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Previous deletion discussions

The last deletion discussion, in January 2009, is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of hobbies. The discussion was very negative, including "Just don't put in everything from the category. The category crowd is, generally, no more intelligent than the listmaking crowd."--Hjal (talk) 05:25, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the link Hjal. As for the arguement you quoted, I believe that both lists and categories are some of the most useful tools we have in navigating Wikipedia. Seems to me that makes both "crowds" pretty "intelligent". To anyone interested in the current nomination discussion, (1) it has been pointed out to me that discussions for past deletion nominations have no bearing on the current nomination, and (2) please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of hobbies (2nd nomination). Thank you, Jeffrey Scott Maxwell (talk) 21:44, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

It's a moot point now. The nomination has been withdrawn. Now I will try to start adding references for notability of list items that are already there. Thank you, Jeffrey Scott Maxwell (talk) 21:50, 31 March 2011 (UTC)

Article improvements

I have added links to referenced articles about recognized hobies, while deleting a few links to articles that may be the subject of some hobbyist interest (e.g., Circus and Zoo attendance, Formula One), but which do not discuss such a hobby in their text. I modified the lead to further define the list as more clearly encyclopedic and which should not be subject to deletion attempts, or, at least, not to successful deletion attempts. This is my changed text, which is still a little klunky, including the hidden text:

"This is a partial list of hobbies. A hobby is an activity, interest, enthusiasm, or amateur pastime that is undertaken for pleasure or relaxation, typically done during one's leisure time. This list includes only recognized hobbies that have been the subject of published discussions or which have organized membership associations. <!--- Entries in this list should be links to Wikipedia articles about specific hobbies, types of hobbies, or to articles about the subjects of hobbies where there is a section with [[WP:RS]]s clearly demonstrating that it is or was a recognized hobby.--->.

It needs language that makes it clear that not all amateur and volunteer activities are hobbies (Volunteer fireman, Safety patrol and it might make more sense to address amateur competitive sports in a separate list, if there isn't one already. I added one See also link and a Reference section, which needs some refs, especially for links to articles that are not about a hobby, but which only include a brief discussion of hobbyist interest in the subject.--Hjal (talk) 22:07, 31 March 2011 (UTC)