Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of African supercentenarians: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 05:27, 10 November 2010

List of African supercentenarians

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

References: Fringe-theory noticeboard, WikiProject discussion

Wholly redundant with other articles, in that every name appears in other more basic articles, primarily the deaths-by-year articles and the list of living supercentenarians, as well as the records articles, each listed at Template:Longevity. I would delete List of European supercentenarians too but I believe it should be double-checked for 100% redundancy first.
Absolutely no reliable sources; every single source is tied to the GRG (one indirectly through Louis Epstein), whose founder and lead members are members of the WP:WOP workgroup that maintains these articles. A rationale that the GRG e-group need not reveal its sources, when they are 95% the same type of Web sources Wikipedians use routinely, is utterly unviable. A rationale that sources are unnecessary because they appear in the bios or other list articles fails because it illustrates the redundancy (and because many list articles also treat sources as unnecessary). Paging WP:V.
The GRG links do not demonstrate that the topic "list of [continental] supercentenarians" is notable; no such continental list occurs anywhere to my knowledge except in WP as a trivia review. A rationale that such data need multiple presentation methods fails because the presentation methods themselves are OR (nobody else uses such methods) and because of undue weight. Redirects are contraindicated because there are no targets and because they would perpetuate the OR.
Numerous longevity-endemic problems to the degree that WP:TNT is better: sparseness of fill leading to too short a list to be notable as a list, in a possible attempt to list every supercentenarian up to three times (by death date, country/continent, and in a bio: undue weight), when the proper approach is to list each notable one once in a small set of list articles (and then to let growth accrue only due to notability and sourcing). Sort by age is wholly OR as if "5th oldest African emigrant" occurs anywhere in the world but this article. COI and walled-garden problems in project (primary editor NickOrnstein is sometimes OK to work with but is spinning his wheels very unnecessarily, keeping this article precisely synched with the others and the GRG pages). Bias against unverified Africans and South Americans, who appear in longevity claims, but for some reason only if they're 113. JJB 05:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 :{{la|List of African supercentenarians}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of African supercentenarians|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2010 November 10#{{anchorencode:List of African supercentenarians}}|View log]]</noinclude>){{•}} {{plainlink|1=http://toolserver.org/~betacommand/reports/afd/{{urlencode:List of African supercentenarians}}.html|2=Afd statistics}}
+:{{la|List of South American supercentenarians}}
 :({{Find sources|List of African supercentenarians}})
+:({{Find sources|List of South American supercentenarians}})
-Wholly redundant .... [[User:John J. Bulten/Friends|JJB]] 04:58, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
+:''References: [[WP:FTN#Longevity-cruft|Fringe-theory noticeboard]], [[Wikipedia talk:WikiProject World's Oldest People#Deletion recommendations|WikiProject discussion]]''
+#Wholly redundant with other articles, in that every name appears in other more basic articles, primarily the deaths-by-year articles and the [[list of living supercentenarians]], as well as the records articles, each listed at [[:Template:Longevity]]. I would delete [[List of European supercentenarians]] too but I believe it should be double-checked for 100% redundancy first.
+#Absolutely no reliable sources; every single source is tied to the [[Gerontology Research Group|GRG]] (one indirectly through Louis Epstein), whose founder and lead members are members of the [[WP:WOP]] workgroup that maintains these articles. A rationale that the GRG e-group need not reveal its sources, when they are 95% the same type of Web sources Wikipedians use routinely, is utterly unviable. A rationale that sources are unnecessary because they appear in the bios or other list articles fails because it illustrates the redundancy (and because many list articles also treat sources as unnecessary). Paging [[WP:V]].
+#The GRG links ''do not'' demonstrate that the topic "list of [continental] supercentenarians" is notable; no such continental list occurs anywhere to my knowledge except in WP as a trivia review. A rationale that such data need multiple presentation methods fails because the presentation methods themselves are OR (nobody else uses such methods) and because of undue weight. Redirects are contraindicated because there are no targets and because they would perpetuate the OR.
+#Numerous longevity-endemic problems to the degree that [[WP:TNT]] is better: sparseness of fill leading to too short a list to be notable as a list, in a ''possible'' attempt to list every supercentenarian up to three times (by death date, country/continent, and in a bio: undue weight), when the proper approach is to list each notable one once in a small set of list articles (and then to let growth accrue only due to notability and sourcing). Sort by age is wholly OR as if "5th oldest African emigrant" occurs anywhere in the world but this article. COI and walled-garden problems in project (primary editor NickOrnstein is sometimes OK to work with but is spinning his wheels very unnecessarily, keeping this article precisely synched with the others and the GRG pages). Bias against unverified Africans and South Americans, who appear in [[longevity claims]], but for some reason only if they're 113. [[User:John J. Bulten/Friends|JJB]] 05:27, 10 November 2010 (UTC)