Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of night vision devices

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. ✗plicit 06:39, 6 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

List of night vision devices[edit]

[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)

List of night vision devices

This list article has a few problems, the most serious of which is that it has no sources. It also does not indicate what the criterion is for inclusion, and so does not satisfy list notability. The criterion isn't having a Wikipedia article, since some of the entries are not linked to articles. This list was moved to draft space by User:BoyTheKingCanDance with the statement that it has no sources (because it has no sources). It was then moved back to article space by its creator without adding sources. This is a contested draftification and so is being sent to AFD. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:08, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Military and Technology. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:08, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the lack of sourcing is a red-herring. Our List of botanists, for example, has no sources, and rightly so: it's a navigational aid to find articles on notable botanists, and all the sourcing required to establish that they are botanists and notable is to be found in the articles on each botanist. The question is whether we really need a navigational aid to find articles on individual night-vision devices. Lists can also be useful to keep articles on the general topic more concise, but since our article on night-vision devices already lists everything, mixed up with the text, this stand-alone list isn't achieving anything particularly useful. Also stand-alone navigational lists shouldn't contain items that don't have a corresponding article. Elemimele (talk) 06:06, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I generally prefer lists to categories, but this list is not in a good state yet. Either this ends up no different from Category:Night vision devices, or it adds red links, or the non-linked entries need sources so they aren't removed. —siro χ o 09:43, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per siro's point above. This list already exists as a category and has nothing to add to that category. Night vision devices that are notable will end up in the category, while non-notable devices don't really belong in the list anyway, because they end up running afoul of WP:NOTADVERT and the list specificity requirements.My vote could be swayed under the condition that the list adds something that the category does not while also having strict enough entry requirements to avoid just becoming a list of every night vision device ever invented (or dreamed of, for that matter). --Licks-rocks (talk) 12:01, 29 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Delete No reason for the article to exist. Article creator even moved the article back to the mainspace after another editor moved it to the draft space for incubation! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Urban Versis 32 (talk • contribs)

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.