Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of rowing blades – Club oars

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 Rename to List of rowing clubs. Sandstein 09:21, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of rowing blades – Club oars[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)

Unsourced (tagged since 2011) gallery with no indication of notability for the topic as a group (individual oars will be verifiable, but that isn't sufficient to have an article here). Only external link is a hobby website, not the kind of source that establishes notability either. Fram (talk) 08:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Fram (talk) 08:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weakest Keep but certainly needs citation. This is a tough one as it empirically does NOT meet Wikipedia's guidelines, but the nature of it (a list of information relating to a broader topic) is of value to that broader topic, which itself has established clear notability. That said, following a few of the club links, it appears that most of them have their own colors (usually in the same image as found here) so this list is a nice reference, but not strictly required. -Markeer 13:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Valid information list. Plenty of things listed have their own articles as well, so valid navigational list as well. Dream Focus 14:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I must have missed it. Which of these rowing blades have their own articles? Fram (talk) 14:50, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - The clubs, like Drummoyne Rowing Club have their own article. --evrik ^(talk) 16:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - This list not just the color of their oars, but the names of the clubs, that's what linked to. Just rename it to List of rowing clubs. So far the Category:Lists of rowing clubs only has List of rowing clubs on the River Wear and List of rowing clubs in Australia. Dream Focus 15:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - Okay, reusing information for a list with a different focus then. That wasn't really clear from your original post... Fram (talk) 15:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Valid information list. --evrik ^(talk) 16:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Copying the text from someone else's vote, which they afterwards had to clarify completely as the original vote didn't make much sense, isn't really helpful. Keep as is, "keep" as a completely repurposed and retitled list, or something else? Fram (talk) 16:21, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Why are you being so aggressive and critical? I thought it was pretty straightforward. Why belabor the issue. I have now started adding references. --evrik ^(talk) 16:31, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - So no reason to keep this actually. Fram (talk) 16:34, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      - This is a lot of negativity for a Monday morning. It's a valid list, it has sources. --evrik ^(talk) 16:53, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        But that's not what creates a valid list. You need sources for the topic as a whole, not just (primary) sources for the individual entries. You could create list of rowing clubs whose president is called John and find sources for that as well, that doesn't mean that it is a valid list. Fram (talk) 17:11, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        It's part of a broader topic, which is itself notable. --evrik ^(talk) 17:24, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        And...? How does this translate to a keep for this list? Notability is not inherited, that an unnamed briader topic is notable has no bearing on this topic. Fram (talk) 19:06, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rename it to List of rowing clubs. --Bduke (talk) 22:16, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would lean towards delete here but I think this needs to be looked at alongside List of rowing blades and List of rowing blades – National team oars. These articles are badly sourced and I cannot find anything other than very niche and unreliable sources speaking about this as a subject. I have a feeling that all of these fail WP:LISTN. I cannot see the argument for navigational purposes unless each individual rowing blade had its own article. To argue for navigational value this would need to be List of rowing clubs as Bduke said above. If reliable sources can be found - I say keep and merge the three. If not - delete all three. Vladimir.copic (talk) 03:46, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to List of rowing clubs as per above. Remove all the non-notables. The distinction of just being a club is more notable than the colours of their oars (or other uniformed equipment). Ajf773 (talk) 09:48, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment At this point the consensus is to keep the article. --evrik ^(talk) 21:39, 5 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Uh, why do you add your interpretation of the consensus at a random point in the discussion? The closing or relisting admin will decide this, they don't need the article creator (or the AfD started) to tell them what the consensus is. Fram (talk) 15:04, 6 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 07:44, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Rename as mentioned above. Gusfriend (talk) 08:59, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Rename to List of rowing clubs, since the current topic does not meet WP:NLIST. MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:11, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would sugges merging to National Team oars or List of rowing blades – School and university, but that would make those unwieldy.--evrik ^(talk) 21:39, 5 February 2022 (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.