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. If anyone wants the content I'll be happy to userfy or move to project space. But this is not a proper article as it stands. Eluchil404 06:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

List of BBC related topics[edit]

List of BBC related topics (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

This article duplicates information already readily available in the BBC Category, as well as the more recent BBC WikiProject. _TheIslander 18:59, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Not just a bare list, but a fairly detailed one. It might be appropriate to move into the BBC Wikiproject space instead of deleting anyway, as it certainly looks useful to me. FrozenPurpleCube 21:31, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - more info than available in a category. Squiddy | (squirt ink?) 21:57, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment - OK, fair comments, but it seems to me that all this page is doing is merging info from the articles, which already exist, with a category page, which already exists. Yes, it's more detailed than a category page, but is it really needed? _TheIslander 22:01, 12 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Is it really "not needed" ? Deletion of it won't serve any real purpose, I think, and I do think organizationally it does serve quite effectively, possibly better than a category. FrozenPurpleCube 00:01, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete The category is more that sufficient in this case. Glossaries are not needed for something like this and a list like this is "not notable" Corpx 06:09, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete It may sound like a neat idea, but it's just another unnecessary list of information that would need to be updated and maintained. The category suffices - if you want to know more, read the article. fuzzy510 07:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

So, how do you feel about moving it to the BBC Portal? Oh, and I've notified WP:BBC about this nomination so they can say their position. FrozenPurpleCube 16:03, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Thanks for that - should really have done it myself, seeings I'm currently active within it, but just clean forgot. As for moving it, I still uphold that it's obsolete, and just duplication of information. _TheIslander 16:36, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, as somebody who knows next to nothing about the BBC, I consider it at least reasonably more informative than a category, thus I consider it multiplication of information. (ow, ow, ow, bad pun, bad pun...) It terms of it being obsolete, obsolete compared to what? The Portal? Not really an improvement either. It looks nice, but I think it could use something like this to inform us folks who don't know what's what. FrozenPurpleCube 17:31, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Obsolete compared to the category or WikiProject in conjunction with the relevant articles. The contents of the list is odd, too. Yes, you've got the main BBC articles in there, but you've then got a small smattering of programmes that are aired on the BBC (not even particularly notable ones), and then a few completely random articles, such as Crown Castle UK, which yes has a slight connection with the BBC, but it's obscure, to say the least. It also seems to me that this list is anything but exhaustive - of course, neither the category nor the Wikiproject are exhaustive, but I feel they're much closer to the mark. I dunno, this list just seems, well, obsolete. I clearly won't be gutted if it's kept, but I don't see a need for it. _TheIslander 17:51, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I do see that the list could be considered incomplete. But since the category and the Wikiproject aren't complete either, I think the maximum benefit is to use all existing valid information. I don't see that this needs to be in the article space, but I do think it could be moved to Project space, and maybe expanded. Or perhaps used to flesh out other methods of navigation. Until then though, I think the best course is to at least utilize it. (though if it is utilized, it might be necessary to be kept for GFDL reasons). FrozenPurpleCube 18:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete This article isn't necessary, the category is more than sufficient and also more comprehensive. Also I don't think the list gives the reader a very good idea of what the BBC does - it contsains several articles that are only slightly connected to the BBC, and misses some more important ones altogether. - Boy1jhn 17:45, 15 August 2007 (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.