Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2008 Donington Superleague Formula round

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. I would expect, however, that unless the page gets a makeover it would not survive another AfD — Coren ^(talk) 03:14, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2008 Donington Superleague Formula round[edit]

I don't think this article as a whole satisfies the notability criteria when comparing it to other forms of motorsport, i.e. Formula One and MotoGP. There is insufficient, third party reliable-sources to satisfy firm notability in the wider range. D.M.N. (talk) 21:14, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete/Merge I believe the series (this is the very first race of the series) is too new and too unknown by the public to really deserve its own separate race entries. The information can be worked into the 2008 Superleague Formula season. The359 (talk) 22:02, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep, but only on the condition that more text is added to bring context to the statistics. If it is to remain just a collection of tables then delete. If text is not provided then the main season article can more than adequately cover the statistics of the racing. --Falcadore (talk) 22:36, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep I think that Wikipedia is the great chance to have an unique motorsport database. A few years ahead the fans will have the possibility to find information of how many categories as possible. (if you find language problems on this text, feel free to edit me, please) (Edmurbobby (talk) 22:57, 14 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
- It shouldn't just be raw stats though. These should be articles not numbers. Suggesting Wikipedia should be a database is selling its potential very short. How did Borja García win the event? Was it dominant? Was it a huge fight? Four cars are listed as 'accident' in race 2 - how did that happen? There are lots of stats databases Wikipedia would be one amongst many in the role, certainly not unique. --Falcadore (talk) 23:08, 14 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - So, if I update the page with an article, until wednesday, explaining how the races happened, the accidents, the way that Garcia won the race 2, Rigon won the race 1, how rain affected the round, the arcticle can be kept? I think you misunderstood me when I said unique database, I mean, the best of. (Edmurbobby (talk) 21:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
    - I did not misunderstand. The best database is still just a database. Wikipedia is categorically not a database.
    - I personally do not have the power to delete, merely the power to influence the consensus. I cannot say "add these details and I won't delete it", I cna only define the parametres under which I would support keeping the article. I would like to see articles accompany pages that consist of pure statistics, and I know I am as guilty of any in this trend, but I am attempting to fix this. A page of pure stats without context is just the same as so many other websites out there that perform the roles of motorsport databases. Wikipedia should not be duplicating work being done capably well by others. If all we are doing is creating stats pages that many others are also doing then Wikipedia should not carry stat pages but instead provide links to motorsport databases websites and link them as references. That is my opinion. --Falcadore (talk) 02:32, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      - Ok, now I got. I respect your point of view about only-stats pages and I'll try to write embased articles to try to convince all of you that Superleague Formula races should be interesting. (Edmurbobby (talk) 03:20, 16 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
        As an aside, if you want to create a motosports stats wiki then head on over to Ten-Tenths' wiki. Wikipedia is, as the name suggests, an encyclopedia and not a database.Pyrop e 13:39, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom. Blaxthos ( t / c ) 00:17, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The "general scope of things" as D.M.N. put at WikiProject Motorsport should not be the criteria for deciding if an article is notable enough. I don't agree that a race needs to be major international event such as Formula One to be notable. This one actually is an international event, with this the first race being televised on an estimated 62 countries. Series FAR less notable than Formula One should be notable enough to warrant enough third-party reliable source coverage. My keep is based on the assumption that third party coverage is found, which should be easy in this case. What exists now needs to get expanded with race coverage, but cleanup is not a reason to delete. Royal broil 00:55, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- It might be easy, but not many sites would of covered it, I doubt BBC, The Times, ESPN or any like that would have anything whatsoever on it. You might find a lot of motorsport websites talking about it, yes, but nothing in the general media aspect of things. D.M.N. (talk) 07:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Delete - I'm sure there are probably enough sources to cover the notability aspect (coverage in specialist press (Autosport etc.) would be considered just as good as an article in The Times for referencing) but really unless someone's willing to spend the time expanding it beyond mere tables of results I don't see the point in keeping this. AlexJ (talk) 20:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: I can only express an opinion on how the page stands at present, and I'm not going to go down the route of "well maybe I'd support it if...". The page is currently a stats dump completely lacking in any form of discursive content or any assertion or proof of notability. If Autosport etc. didn't cover this series then I would have been very surprised, but then they also cover local banger racing and I don't see anyone arguing that their coverage provides a notability basis for extensive results articles from those series. The series as a whole has attracted some national media attention, but this race itself went almost entirely unreported. Pyrop e 13:46, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. -- Fabrictramp | talk to me 23:11, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Keep: It's a new racing series, so you have to give it some leeway before race reports will be up to the proper standard of other series' such as F1, IndyCar, A1GP etc. It needs references to establish notability, but for now give it the benefit of the doubt. See if those who created it can improve on it, and if not then Merge into the overall season's page. TheChrisD ^{Rants•Edits} 11:33, 18 September 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.