Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Belgian Orienteering Federation (2nd nomination)

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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. Very strong consensus that there is no inherent failure to satisfy notability (with certain very clearly notable examples) and thus any AfDs should be strictly limited to federations that fail to meet notability. There was also consensus to specifically point out a need to check that country's wiki during any future BEFORE checks.

Some of the Keep !votes indicated specific statements that all articles should be kept, however this aspect is less clear-cut. I considered leaving this AfD open until the Keep all aspect was resolved, but that would be functionally ignoring a consensus on this specific AfD. (non-admin closure) Nosebagbear (talk) 22:40, 21 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Belgian Orienteering Federation[edit]

AfDs for this article:

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

Belgian Orienteering Federation (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)
(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

I nominated this article in 2015, but it was closed as no consensus (NPASR). Since then, I still do not believe that this organization, or other national orienteering federations / organizations are notable for their own articles. Natg 19 (talk) 01:29, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also bundling the following pages as non-notable orienteering organizations:

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 01:30, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. Natg 19 (talk) 01:30, 8 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 07:55, 15 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • First, I note that none of the also bundled pages have been tagged for deletion, in spite of the fact that it is 9 days since the main article was tagged. Second, I note that these articles are a mixed lot. Some are quite detailed and well referenced and some are very brief. --Bduke (talk) 05:00, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all. I had to re-edit the nomination as I had the new tags pointing to the original AfD. I think they are now correct. Like other national sporting organisations, I think Orienteering Federations are likely to be notable. I have no interest in this sport. The article for my own country, Australia, is well sourced and and the others can be with some effort. --Bduke (talk) 05:15, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belarus-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Belgium-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Croatia-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Czech Republic-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Estonia-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Finland-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of France-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Germany-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Hungary-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Italy-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. Sam Sailor 15:37, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep. I haven't looked up all the nominated federations, but the one that's the reason I found this AfD – the Finnish Orienteering Federation – is the national organisation for 60,000 active participants, according to excellent third-party sources. At the very least, I think the nomination is a bit too broad. /Julle (talk) 20:42, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep No, there's no reason to blanket-delete national orienteering federations. Although it's not an olympic sport, it's still somewhat popular in some European countries. Some federations might be small and perhaps not notable, but certainly not all of them should deleted. --Pudeo (talk) 23:24, 17 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Keep all. Some of these are quite well referenced. And some are not, but a quick look at the various home language wikis for these articles shows that there is a lot of material that could be brought over. Just because a lot of the world does not have English as their first language does not mean ignore it. Aoziwe (talk) 05:52, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Commment. I disagree with the blanket nomination - surely notability (WP:GNG and WP:ORG in particular) has to be decided on a case-by-case basis, not merely by saying "hey these look stubby and unpopular". On the other hand, I don't see a single valid "Keep" argument above. "Likely to be notable"? Notability needs to be proven, that's what guidelines are for, and there's no point in guessing. "60,000 active participants" - so what? WP:GNG and WP:ORG require sources, not hands. "Although it's not an olympic sport, it's still somewhat popular in some European countries" - doesn't matter since the articles are about the organizations, not about the sport. "Quite well referenced" - the best among the arguments but still not enough: do these references count towards meeting WP:ORG and/or WP:GNG or not? Finally, as a member of WP Croatia, I'd say probably the best choice would be to rename Croatian Orienteering Federation to Orienteering in Croatia and amend the contents accordingly. For one thing, it makes no sense to create an article on a more narrow topic in the absence of an article on a more general topic. This could be the way to go for other nominated articles too, although again this is best decided on a case-by-case basis. GregorB (talk) 21:02, 20 November 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.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Belgian_Orienteering_Federation_(2nd_nomination)&oldid=870028841"