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 keep. The general opinion is that the article has enough potential to be improved to a satisfactory standard. Ritchie333 ^(talk) ^(cont) 21:12, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsuch Parkrun

[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Appears to be an event only of local significance. I cannot find any non-trivial coverage of it in a broader area. Google search comes up with only 88 unique results. ... discospinster _talk 19:46, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:02, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:02, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of England-related deletion discussions. MT Train^Talk 03:02, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hi. I understand why you have put in the AfD. My opinion is that the event is notable due to the many thousands of runners who have taken part in the event during its history. , in addition to the roughly 500 participants who race there every week. In my opinion this makes the event sizeable. The event encourages some runners from further afield than just the local area. The run was sourced in a Mayor of London headed website, I would describe this as non-local due to the size of London. It is referenced on the page. I appreciate that multiple sources of the event have come from the local paper, the Epsom Guardian. Whilst a lot of information is sourced from the Nonsuch Parkrun page itself, I believe this should be used as it contains well detailed, undisputed, official information in regard to the result of the page. Given the page has only been up for a couple of days, can some time (e.g a week) be given to help improve the page? Thanks.Froome2017 (talk) 14:32, 29 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Delete. I Love Parkrun, highest ever finish is 7th, waiting for my 100 T-Shirt. Individual events are not notable. Szzuk (talk) 13:06, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Glad you enjoy parkrun, I do as well. I do think it would benefit wikipedia to have these articles as I feel they are a massive part of the community. Wikipedia's coverage of parkrun is very patchy, considering that around a million people in the uk have participated in it. The fact that so many events take place makes it difficult for individual runs to get major coverage, however some runs get into BBC national reports from time to time. Whilst the page may not meet the strict interpretation of the wikipedia notability guidelines, I think the tens of thousands of participants over its history means it is worthy of a wikipedia article. Froome2017 (talk) 19:55, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment. I don't think we'll be keeping this article, it has 3 primary refs and 1 talking about parkrun in general so fails WP:V and WP:N. Individual parkruns are usually deleted due to lack of coverage. If you want to discuss the unfairness you could try a WP:RFC but it is unlikely you would get anywhere with that. If you wish to write parkrun articles I will give you a few ideas which have a better chance of being retained - List of Parkruns, Junior Parkrun, Volunteering in Parkrun. Szzuk (talk) 20:33, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In the spirit of nothing is notable enough, this one isn't notable either, perhaps the thusands of participants over many years every week need to be registered as for profit enterprises like the NBA to be worthy of recognition. Perhaps we shall delete half of Wikipedia. NWWT (talk) 04:37, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have found a reference which in detail talks about Nonsuch Parkrun's most successful runner, Ollie Garrod. Whilst technically as you say the page is 'not notable enough', I hope the number of runners is taken into consideration. Thanks Szzuk for suggesting more parkrun articles, I might write them later on in the year. I would invite all Wikipedia editors to help improve the page, as well as others in relation to parkrun. Froome2017 (talk) 12:10, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep For the reasons I have listed above. I think coverage for parkrun in general, given its 3 million registered users is woefully low and I will endeavour to improve it. Maybe it is to do with the amateur/recreational nature of the events. I believe the majority of individual parkrun events are notable due to consistently high participant numbers. For this reason, I think media coverage of the events could be greater, but it is improving. I do not see how deleting this article could improve Wikipedia. Perhaps by the letter of Wikipedia policy this might fall slightly short, but I think discretion can and should be used. Froome2017 (talk) 12:10, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No consensus yet reached in my view, I would recommend we keep this discussion open another few days. Froome2017 (talk) 13:42, 4 April 2018 (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.