Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2018 African Weightlifting Championships

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 keep. (non-admin closure) feminist (talk) 01:23, 14 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

2018 African Weightlifting Championships

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Wikipedia is not a stat book. Even notable articles about sports topics (per WP:SPORTSEVENT) should have well-sourced prose, not merely a list of stats. This has no prose and is counter to the purpose of Wikipedia. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 21:05, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:59, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Africa-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:59, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:59, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 23:59, 6 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Are you merely complaining that there is not yet any prose, or are you claiming that no prose could be written? postdlf (talk) 04:21, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Postdlf: Given what the 2017 African Weightlifting Championships and the 2016 African Weightlifting Championships look like, I do not think much, if any, prose could or would be written. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:39, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I realize the wording of my initial complaint may have made it seem like lack of prose was my only concern, my main concern is still notability per WP:SPORTSEVENT, which was evidenced by bad sourcing, and no prose -- which is why I then googled it and found not much in the way of sources beyond just results. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 04:41, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're concerned that what exactly isn't notable? African Weightlifting Championships, or this particular year of it? postdlf (talk) 22:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The individual year. The event itself seems notable, although I'm not sure if each individual year needs it's own page, which is why we're here. Captain Eek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 23:24, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Keep WP:ILIKEIT WP:PRESERVE WP:ATD Lightburst (talk) 20:01, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. The coverage that I was able to find is borderline. There's this (which was added to the article after it was listed for deletion), and also articles like this which are only a little bit more than just a listing of results. Far from clear-cut establishment of notability, but somewhere close. Given that systemic bias is a thing, that many of the countries involved are not primarily anglophone, and that we have articles on many comparable tournaments, I'm going to err on the side of presuming notability. Lowercaserho (talk) 20:53, 8 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep.Montell 74 (talk) 20:04, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - No ILIKEIT/PRESERVE necessary. Having just a bunch of stats is pretty sad, but there's enough coverage I see when searching for variations of "africa[n] weightlifting championship[s] [2018/mauritius]" to convince me we should retain the article. This seems to be a quite legitimate international competition and an Olympics qualifying event to boot, so there's some national coverage like the Cameroon Tribune (via AllAfrica) and Seychelles Nation as well as local stories like news24 in South Africa. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:02, 13 October 2019 (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.