Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Argentina at the 2015 UCI Track Cycling World 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 merge/repurpose all into by-country articles. Strong agreement that these by-country-by-year articles are not appropriate, with a general consensus that merging and standardizing them into by-country articles is a better course of action than outright deletion. Editors have expressed a willingness to undertake this daunting task (ping XyZAn!), but if efforts are not underway within a reasonable period of time, the articles should be re-nominated. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 17:47, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Argentina at the 2015 UCI Track Cycling World Championships

Nations at the xxx pages are usually reserved for events with multiple sports or disciplines. This one focuses on just one sport. Also quoting Peter Rehse, from another similar AFD [1], "they are all a rehash of a single source. National results for events that are borderline notable themselves. Even there there is nothing demonstrating that [the country] performed anywhere near notable." Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 02:44, 23 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Strong delete - it is an example of proliferation of sports statistics cruft that's best left for dedicated databases. Renata (talk) 01:26, 26 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Question Sportsfan 1234, it would help to know how comprehensive this nomination is meant to be. As far as you know, does it include every single "[County] at the [Year] UCI Track Cycling World Championships" article? No complaint if you missed one or several by accident, of course. The point is whether you (a) are trying to get them all deleted, (b) believe that some should stay, (c) nominated just these ones to test the water, or (d) something else. Nyttend (talk) 04:43, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nyttend, this list is meant to be an exhaustive one. I am pretty sure all of them are listed here. Hopefully there isn't any missing (there shouldn't be). Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 04:52, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. This can now be treated as an attempt to trash the whole collection. If this is closed as "delete", and if you missed one or two, those ones can be deleted too (even though they weren't included here) unless they're significantly different from the rest in quality, size, etc. Nyttend (talk) 05:23, 28 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Merge. While I generally agree with arguments in favor of delete, I feel the best solution would be to merge the per-country-per-year articles into per-country articles (Argentina at the UCI Track Cycling World Championships, etc.). GregorB (talk) 12:17, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Support GregorB's proposal. --NaBUru38 (talk) 22:21, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GregorB ([[User talk

comment at least some articles (I did a small sample) are not tagged pointing to this discussion. I ask @Sportsfan 1234: to tag them, and ask to pace their nominations for deletion which are counting up from a thousand in a week or so. I also ask admins assessing this discussion to count the 7 day discussion period starting only after all articles are tagged. Nabla (talk) 23:00, 29 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. All articles in this discussion have been tagged now. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 00:42, 30 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Relisting comment: Many of the nominated articles were not tagged until very late in the discussion period. – Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, – Juliancolton | ^Talk 01:23, 31 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep

1) The nominator says events that are borderline notable themselves, well the event meets WP:NCYC

2) As per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/France at the 2014 European Athletics Championships.

3) The nominator says Nations at the xxx pages are usually reserved for events with multiple sports or disciplines. But the same kind of series are made for the Category:Nations at the European Athletics Championships and Category:Nations at the World Championships in Athletics. These events have the same notability standard.

4) Such pages where discussed at the Cycling Wikiproject, see Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Cycling/Archive 12#Country pages for the UCI Road World championships. Lugnuts, XyZAn and Buzzards-Watch Me Work joined the discussion and nobody was against.

or Renaming: It might be better to rename all such pages into like 2015 in Dutch track cycling, 2015 in French track cycling etc.. (Note that merging into the national pages is difficult as there are already pages named Netherlands at the UCI Track Cycling World Championships, Australia at the UCI Track Cycling World Championships. )

Sander.v.Ginkel ^(Talk) 13:35, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge as per GregorB, standardise to [Country] at [Competition], this is also something I brought up at WT:CYC XyZAn (talk) 13:57, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Merge as per GregorB. Should be {country} at the {sporting event}, add specific history as notable.Timtempleton (talk) 01:27, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:21, 7 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Renata and per the other related discussions. People in favour of merging should ask themselves if they are willing to do it. Laurdecl ^talk 09:17, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Laurdecl, yes I would be.. XyZAn (talk) 17:18, 11 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  - @XyZAn: Every single one of these? If you're serious then I change to Merge and you deserve an award. Laurdecl ^talk 02:30, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Laurdecl: Yup, tbh I don't see it as a massive task, I'd probably aim to do a few countries a night so all in all I think I could have the content merged within a couple of weeks and redirects placed on the above articles. I'm sure I could recruit a number of WP:CYC members too. XyZAn (talk) 17:19, 12 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 07:31, 13 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Merge and redirect per above. Montanabw^(talk) 08:14, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete Low quality pages that just reproduce race results from the UCI website. Not encyclopedic content that is indiscriminate and no hope of ever being turned into an actual Wikipedia article with context and explanation. This is the definition of pure trivia. FuriouslySerene (talk) 08:31, 15 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete As others have argued above, these pages are a sort of cruft, creating a proliferation of pages that essentially perform the function of a database, which Wikipedia is not. This is true of XXX at YYY games pages in general, but it is especially true for a very specific single-discipline sport. Vanamonde (talk) 09:43, 17 January 2017 (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.