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 no consensus. MBisanz ^talk 01:37, 23 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of motorcycle clubs (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) (delete) – (View log)

3rd AfD, 2nd some months ago had sock-puppet issues. As the list currently says, This is a list of articles of motorcycle-related clubs. Names without WP articles should not be placed in this list and will be removed. which makes the perfect case for a category, which already exists. This list does not do anything to complement the category because there is no explanatory text and it is explicitly not used for red-link development. I happen to agree with that because many motorcycle clubs are not notable. Further there is no specific inclusion criteria. Is this worldwide? Is it every motorcycle club on Wikipedia? Are they even all notable clubs? Thoughts? TravellingCari 12:54, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- TravellingCari 12:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per nom's full and complete reasoning. I also wonder about putting a warning that redlinks will be deleted. Sounds like ownership, not a good idea to start with. Category already exists and serves exact same purpose and since NO additional information has been introduced into the list, it isn't justified. PHARMBOY (TALK) 19:57, 18 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Lists and categories are not mutually exclusive, this is a common misconception in Afd, and is not supported by any policy. As for there being no additional info, there could be if anybody bothered to add it, this is also not a valid reason to delete anything, ever. I am intrigued by the approach though, I mean, if I added even a picture, would that invalidate the reasoning to delete? Redlinks are no doubt barred as this is one of those types of high traffic popular subject article where their addition snowballs rapidly into a list of any club in existence, with many having no hope of ever getting an article. It is just as easy for inexperienced users to request a new article at the least on the talk page, or to find WP:RA, than to add a redlink in the list, therefore barring redlinks is not a draconian measure by any means. Inclusion criteria is quite simple, any club with an article. There is nothing out of the ordinary in that, it is the default position for any "List of ...." article. MickMacNee (talk) 00:56, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Strong Delete Otherwise anyone can just post any club, even if it is only 2 people. What constitues a club anyway? It is not quantifiable. People either ignore "Names without WP articles should not be placed in this list and will be removed." or try and add a WP for them and their buddies. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lansing3456 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete There is already a category. No need for a list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.28.215.62 (talk) 17:17, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep Obviously it is limited to those clubs having articles in WP, so the objections raised by Lansing above are irrelevant; that we delete redlinks from lists like this is standard practice, & I like many others here keep track of some susceptible lists for the purpose of removing them, and it is very usual to warn people of his--its editing, not ownership. Categories and lists are not exclusive--indeed, they are complementary, and whenever there is potential information that might help browsing a list is justified--some indication of geographical locations(s) would be the obvious thing here, and perhaps dates. Expand the information, and keep. DGG (talk) 02:59, 20 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep - plenty of potential(country/region/etc). Deletion of redlinks is an edit issue. Cat / List argument ad nauseum. Exit2DOS2000^•T•C• 00:16, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment when someone says there's no difference, that's an ad nauseum. There is a difference in general but in this case there is none. They are entirely replicated. Plenty of potential for separate lists with inclusion criteria-this has no set criteria. TravellingCari 03:25, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Yes it does - any club with an article. This is standard procedure. MickMacNee (talk) 10:56, 21 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. This should be a category, not an article. Niteshift36 (talk) 20:42, 21 October 2008 (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.