Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/17 October in India

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 delete. Consensus is clear that this sort of intersection is not something that should belong here —SpacemanSpiff 06:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

17 October in India

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

This kind of calendar articles is usually deleted on Wikipedia, since the only common thing between these events is a coincidence, and doesn't contribute any historical knowledge (unlike year)by-year articles, where you get a historical timeline). It's telling that we don't have any other "17 October in" articles (nor at first glance for any of the other articles). Fram (talk) 14:31, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Also nominated (and so tagged) are the other 37 articles in Category:Days of the year in India. Fram (talk) 14:35, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all, and the category too. The Main Page may have "On this day..." as a feature, but that doesn't make "On this day" articles any more than a trivial intersection of dates and events. Squeamish Ossifrage (talk) 16:35, 17 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 01:56, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Delete all. Non-standard organizational scheme. The problem is that every event that has ever happened in India falls into one of 365 days. Thus these articles would grow to be unusable in length, they are too indiscriminate. A curated list is fine, such as on the front page, but we don't create curated list articles, since that would be POV, unless there is a NPOV rule of what to include or exclude, but no way to do that here. I think what is trying to be achieved can be done automatically using Wikidata, though Wikidata is not developed enough yet, it will be soon enough. -- Green Cardamom (talk) 05:52, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- All articles are curated, as we are always deciding what verifiable facts to include or not based on our own editorial judgment. For lists that have no finite and defined group, inclusion criteria is up to editors to determine. We then may use Template:Dynamic list. Many such "curated" lists are featured lists (e.g., List of 1920s jazz standards, Timeline of the London Underground). postdlf (talk) 16:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all They are the result of one editor's (abandoned) effort with no project or other organized support. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 09:24, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. My first reaction was to agree with the nom without reservation, but we do have October 17...and every other date. Whether it makes sense to further split by country is another question, but there is at least established practice for listing events throughout history that coincidentally share a date. postdlf (talk) 16:27, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note that this discussion here established a consensus to merge these. -- Mufka ^(u) ^(t) ^(c) 17:13, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Since the merge was never done should we just delete them? The amount of merge work here is considerable. At what point to do we call it a day (heh). -- Green Cardamom (talk) 17:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Don't delete The reasons listed here for deletion sound invalid. wikipedia do have pages with calendar articles with above mentioned reasons eg:) October 17 (Eastern Orthodox liturgics), October 17, 2004, October 17. There is no other valid reasons have been mentioned in the discussion which critize only these pages. These pages are simply followed rules from Wikipedia:DOY within country limits with national notablity. some of the reasons like single editor articles, no organized supports will be rectified if it is needed to sustain. Thanks for bringing this to attention --Neechalkaran (talk) 00:35, 19 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all and category. The Wikipedia:DOY project is committed to tending to 365 articles, one for each day of the year, and not a zillion "October 10 in xyz" articles. Using Neechalkaran's logic, we can also have "October 10 in football", "October 10 in literature", etc. etc. etc. It makes sense to keep all the information for a particular date in a single article about that date and not fragment the information across "date in category" articles. There's no policy based support for inclusion of articles like this, especially facing the clear consensus to keep and tend to the general DOY pages. Livit⇑^Eh?/_What? 19:13, 25 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all and category. As mentioned above, having calendar dates intersected with a country would be both unmanageable and unneccessary - there is an article for every day of the year, so information which is regarded as important/relevant can be included on those pages. PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 02:22, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.