Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/UEFA Euro 2012 schedule: Difference between revisions
Appearance
Content deleted Content added
ChrisTheDude (talk | contribs) →UEFA Euro 2012 schedule: fixed last edit |
it's utterly ridiculous to tag IP comments as SPAs. |
||
Line 51: | Line 51: | ||
*'''Keep''' Simple deletion is wrong because this contains a chronological summary, something not contained in the main article. A merge is possible, I suppose, but would result in the main article getting too cluttered. Perhaps move to [[Chronological Summary of UEFA Euro 2012]] and then add sections with Details on Day 1, Day 2, etc. underneath the table? [[User:Smartyllama|Smartyllama]] ([[User talk:Smartyllama|talk]]) 23:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Keep''' Simple deletion is wrong because this contains a chronological summary, something not contained in the main article. A merge is possible, I suppose, but would result in the main article getting too cluttered. Perhaps move to [[Chronological Summary of UEFA Euro 2012]] and then add sections with Details on Day 1, Day 2, etc. underneath the table? [[User:Smartyllama|Smartyllama]] ([[User talk:Smartyllama|talk]]) 23:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC) |
||
:*I'd rather we not "solve" this in the usual way by jumping through hoops and awkwardly expanding the scope of the page to meet the arbitrarily enforced demands of some self-appointed content zealots. I'm still waiting for someone to explain why this page of all, highly useful and closing in on a million views for only a couple of days, has to be deleted ''right now''. Until then, no jumping through their hoops for me. --[[Special:Contributions/195.14.199.250|195.14.199.250]] ([[User talk:195.14.199.250|talk]]) 00:18, 12 June 2012 (UTC) |
:*I'd rather we not "solve" this in the usual way by jumping through hoops and awkwardly expanding the scope of the page to meet the arbitrarily enforced demands of some self-appointed content zealots. I'm still waiting for someone to explain why this page of all, highly useful and closing in on a million views for only a couple of days, has to be deleted ''right now''. Until then, no jumping through their hoops for me. --[[Special:Contributions/195.14.199.250|195.14.199.250]] ([[User talk:195.14.199.250|talk]]) 00:18, 12 June 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep'''. I use it multiple times a day, I only came here to say this because of the deletion notice. Are you people serious? For the love of god keep it. Thank you. If it really bothers you so much, delete it after the tournament. [[Special:Contributions/46.137.188.72|46.137.188.72]] ([[User talk:46.137.188.72|talk]]) 07:04, 12 June 2012 (UTC) |
*'''Keep'''. I use it multiple times a day, I only came here to say this because of the deletion notice. Are you people serious? For the love of god keep it. Thank you. If it really bothers you so much, delete it after the tournament. [[Special:Contributions/46.137.188.72|46.137.188.72]] ([[User talk:46.137.188.72|talk]]) 07:04, 12 June 2012 (UTC) |
||
*'''Keep'''. Chronology is content. Saying that the info on this page is the same as the main Euro page shows a deep misunderstanding of what original information actually is. A timeline is information, even if each event is already described somewhere else -- ask a history teacher. {{unsigned |
*'''Keep'''. Chronology is content. Saying that the info on this page is the same as the main Euro page shows a deep misunderstanding of what original information actually is. A timeline is information, even if each event is already described somewhere else -- ask a history teacher. {{unsigned|212.198.174.127}} |
Revision as of 13:38, 12 June 2012
- UEFA Euro 2012 schedule (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)
It is a totally redundant content fork to UEFA Euro 2012. Every date, venue and result information can be found on this article. There is no meaning to make a separate article for a schedule. Article also doesn't meed the GNG, as there are no independent coverage in reliable sources, which discuss the schedule of this competition. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 22:28, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Delete as per the reason above, the article content covered in main article on the tournament already. No need to merge.Seasider91 (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Football-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 00:01, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- 169.587 hits in a single day say speedy keep and snowball close. Moreover, the schedule page presents the data at-a-glance in a userfriendly table format that is nevertheless not useful for the main article. Thus, the page greatly increases reader access to a specific data subset. Imho it would be a disservice to readers to delete/redirect the page. You may notice how I keep using the word "page" instead of "article", because obviously the page is not a full article by any measure. The question is: does it have to be? What's the harm in offering the reader a highly useful overview over this highly notable set of data? Why not propose merger or deletion after the competition is concluded? Why does it have to be right now? --195.14.221.65 (talk) 05:58, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- WP:ITSUSEFUL and WP:PAGEVIEWSTATS are not valid reasons to keep any article. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 07:37, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- My arguments provide an excellent reason not to nominate the page for deletion in the first place. Again: Why not propose merger or deletion after the competition is concluded? Why does it have to be right now? I also reject your characterization of my reasoning as WP:ITSUSEFUL, which clearly states that this concerns only !votes without argumentation. I did provide my reasoning for why exactly the page is useful, therefore WP:ITSUSEFUL does not apply. You may want to actually read essays before citing them. If you don't agree with my reasoning that the main article does not present an at-a-glance overview of the schedule, just say so. But please don't pretend that I didn't present any reasoning, that's simply not collegial or honest. --195.14.221.65 (talk) 12:19, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- WP:ITSUSEFUL and WP:PAGEVIEWSTATS are not valid reasons to keep any article. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 07:37, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Delete Euro 2012 already has the schedule information, but redirect could be useful. Brandmeistertalk 09:43, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep The article shouldn't be deleted, because it provides all information on matches timing. However, the Euro 2012 page just provides the schedule on a group basis which is inconvenient (because you have through every group to know the schedule. A.h. king • Talk to me! 14:17, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- There are separate entries on every match of the group stage and they contain the related schedule, see UEFA_Euro_2012#Group_stage. Brandmeistertalk 14:35, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- It is more convenient to have all the schedule in one article. A.h. king • Talk to me! 18:11, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Agreed, it is an incredibly useful page.de Mediātōre Scientiae (discutere) 23:30, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- There are separate entries on every match of the group stage and they contain the related schedule, see UEFA_Euro_2012#Group_stage. Brandmeistertalk 14:35, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Delete per nom. We're not TV Guide, and the information is redundant. Ask yourself this question: "Will the information this page be at all useful six months from now?" The answer vhere is no, and therefore this isn't material for Wikipedia. Sven Manguard Wha? 14:56, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Ask yourself this question: "Is the page useful right now?" Then what's the hurry? Why not delete it after Euro 2012 has concluded? Why right now? --195.14.221.65 (talk) 16:21, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- the information is redundant -- Not entirely, no. The main article contains no chronologically sorted overview. You may argue that that's not sufficient to justify a separate page, but there is in fact information in the schedule page that isn't currently included in the main article in any form. --195.14.207.176 (talk) 09:59, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep This is really useful. Secretlondon (talk) 17:57, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Encyclopaedic information in a reader friendly form that Wikipedia does so well. This at a glance information will be as valid in 1,000 years as it is today. The only real question is where to place the chart - is it better in a click-through stand-alone, or embedded in the main article in a collapsible. Not really a question for AfD. SilkTork ✔Tea time 18:02, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Extremely useful article which I myself have had stickied in my browser for the past week. I can't fathom why anyone would be so anal as to nominate this for deletion. --Schcambo (talk) 18:30, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- WP:ITSUSEFUL. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 12:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Get over yourself mate. Numerous users here have given numerous reasons as to why it should be kept, which is explicitly allowed under WP:ITSUSEFUL. I'd advise you accept that other people have a different opinion from you and move onto something more fruitful and worthwhile than this discussion. --Schcambo (talk) 21:47, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- WP:ITSUSEFUL. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 12:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep I strongly agree that this page should not be deleted as it contains all relevant info about the match results. Trelos physikos (talk) 19:03, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- UEFA Euro 2012 also contain all the relevant info about the match results. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 12:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yeah, but not in a concise and chronologically ordered format as found in this page. I think that his alone justifies this page's existence. Finally, about the WP:ITSUSEFUL, please stop quoting it again and again, by now we are all familiar with it...Trelos physikos (talk) 13:23, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- UEFA Euro 2012 also contain all the relevant info about the match results. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 12:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Speedy Keep Needs to be fleshed out, but it is notable. Nominator's assertion that there is no coverage is false. Just Google "Euro 2012 schedule". Tchaliburton (talk) 20:45, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
- But they only contain the schedule and don't discuss it in detail. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 12:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, there is little in the way of analytical examination of the schedule. How does that render the schedule of the UEFA Euro 2012 a non-notable subtopic? No offence, but doesn't this all strike you as a rather pointless exercise at this point? What are you hoping to achieve? An AfD would have had far better chances a month ago, or a month from now. And you know that perfectly well, which once again begs the question: Why right now? --195.14.207.70 (talk) 15:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Don't see, why an article should be kept for one more month, if it doesn't belong there. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 16:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- You're missing the point: This AfD is rapidly failing, and foreseeably so. The question is, why then did you nominate it for deletion at this exact point in time, when you must have known the AfD would have no chance during the tournament? Tell me you're not just making a point similar to how you keep citing ITSUSEFUL, or how you tagged the page for lack of secondary sources on the day of the opening match instead of just popping a FUKITOL and moving on. --78.35.236.49 (talk) 16:43, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- I can't see the future and therefore I had no idea, how it would end. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 17:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- That's either naive or dishonest. Which do you consider less unflattering? We'll just settle on that. --78.35.236.49 (talk) 17:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- I can't see the future and therefore I had no idea, how it would end. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 17:35, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- You're missing the point: This AfD is rapidly failing, and foreseeably so. The question is, why then did you nominate it for deletion at this exact point in time, when you must have known the AfD would have no chance during the tournament? Tell me you're not just making a point similar to how you keep citing ITSUSEFUL, or how you tagged the page for lack of secondary sources on the day of the opening match instead of just popping a FUKITOL and moving on. --78.35.236.49 (talk) 16:43, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Don't see, why an article should be kept for one more month, if it doesn't belong there. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 16:18, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Yes, there is little in the way of analytical examination of the schedule. How does that render the schedule of the UEFA Euro 2012 a non-notable subtopic? No offence, but doesn't this all strike you as a rather pointless exercise at this point? What are you hoping to achieve? An AfD would have had far better chances a month ago, or a month from now. And you know that perfectly well, which once again begs the question: Why right now? --195.14.207.70 (talk) 15:25, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- But they only contain the schedule and don't discuss it in detail. Armbrust, B.Ed. WrestleMania XXVIII The Undertaker 20–0 12:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep THis is extremely useful and is not redundant at all: it organises the matches by date, not by group. Definitely do NOT delete this - it will be a huge loss of a very useful page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.68.75.29 (talk) 12:04, 10 June 2012 (UTC) — 81.68.75.29 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- I'm not sure you have actually read WP:ITSUSEFUL. If people say that an article is useful and give reasons, that is a argument for inclusion - "If reasons are given, "usefulness" can be the basis of a valid argument for inclusion." The above keep comment gives valid reasons for keeping. SilkTork ✔Tea time 19:51, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. I know WP:ITSUSEFUL, but still don't really think it's sensible to delete such an eminently useful piece of information. —Nightstallion 13:41, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. It provides users with infos in one single article and therefore it should not be deleted. Those infos can't be found on the main article (time and stadium). Oh, and Armbrust, just stop with the WP:ITSUSEFUL, really annoying to see it under every comment, just because someone has another opinion. Kante4 (talk) 14:30, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in WikiProject Football's list of association football-related deletions. ★☆ DUCKISJAMMMY☆★ 14:40, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- *Keep. One place to quickly find match results, timetable etc. בורה בורה (talk) 15:28, 10 June 2012 (UTC) — בורה בורה (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.
- Are you implying that it's useful? --195.14.207.70 (talk) 15:54, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
- Delete. It's just a fork, all the info is already in the main article. It's not going to be fleshed out even if it passes this AFD - it will most likely be nominated for deletion after the competition finishes anyway. Nanonic (talk) 06:59, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- Please keep. This page is clearly very useful to many readers. Even if this happens to be a case where Wikipedia's notability rules might endorse deletion, WP:IAR should be used to keep the page. 91.224.27.227 (talk) 08:55, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- KEEP. This page is far more useful than the main page on the Euro 2012 - I found this first and then was very confused by the less helpful main page. This is better organized and has pertinent details that are missing in the other page. One other option is to put this at the top of the other page. — 174.51.60.248 (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic. The preceding unsigned comment was added at 21:46, 11 June 2012 (UTC).
- Keep. This page has day to day utility for the duration of the tournament. Also, it is useful independently as a clear timeline of the matches. The main page is fine for the the first time visitor, but this page is of more practical use. Should be preserved for posterity. --Darwin (talk) 22:31, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- Merge/redirect to UEFA Euro 2012. This is a content fork that has no need to exist as a standalone article. If this table is designed in a superior fashion to the main article page then that is a good argument to merge it into the main and replace the less useful tables. Resolute 22:57, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- The info in the main article's group stage section is sorted by groups, and it includes the group tables. So this table couldn't replace the content of the group stage section. One viable alternative has been proposed further above, to just add the schedule table there, perhaps in a collapsible box. Personally, I still believe it makes more sense (I know, I know, WP:ITMAKESMORESENSE) to keep it as a separate page for the time being. I certainly see no harm in it. We could even break new ground here and decide now that the page will be redirected to the main page at the conclusion of the competition. Why not? --195.14.199.250 (talk) 00:05, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep Simple deletion is wrong because this contains a chronological summary, something not contained in the main article. A merge is possible, I suppose, but would result in the main article getting too cluttered. Perhaps move to Chronological Summary of UEFA Euro 2012 and then add sections with Details on Day 1, Day 2, etc. underneath the table? Smartyllama (talk) 23:52, 11 June 2012 (UTC)
- I'd rather we not "solve" this in the usual way by jumping through hoops and awkwardly expanding the scope of the page to meet the arbitrarily enforced demands of some self-appointed content zealots. I'm still waiting for someone to explain why this page of all, highly useful and closing in on a million views for only a couple of days, has to be deleted right now. Until then, no jumping through their hoops for me. --195.14.199.250 (talk) 00:18, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. I use it multiple times a day, I only came here to say this because of the deletion notice. Are you people serious? For the love of god keep it. Thank you. If it really bothers you so much, delete it after the tournament. 46.137.188.72 (talk) 07:04, 12 June 2012 (UTC)
- Keep. Chronology is content. Saying that the info on this page is the same as the main Euro page shows a deep misunderstanding of what original information actually is. A timeline is information, even if each event is already described somewhere else -- ask a history teacher. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.198.174.127 (talk • contribs)