Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of regional flag proposals

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 soft delete. Based on minimal participation, this uncontroversial nomination is treated as an expired PROD (a.k.a. "soft deletion"). Editors can request the article's undeletion. ✗plicit 12:26, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

List of regional flag proposals

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

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

Putting this here not really as a deletion discussion, but as a what-to-do-with-this discussion. It's been tagged as OR and for want of sources for a year now (I expect some synthesis stuff in there too), has a really vague inclusion criterion, and I don't really see a viable path to improvement short of splitting this into multiple lists with stricter inclusion criteria, which is basically WP:TNT. Iseult^Δxparlez moi 06:09, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 09:27, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Delete I was also considering tagging this article for deletion when I came across it but decided against it after knowing there was an article for national flag proposals. But now I'm thinking that maybe List of national flag proposals should be nominated for deletion too on the basis that anyone can propose a flag and that "well-documented" is very ambiguous term for describing something. I'm aware that dynamic lists exist, but this seems like an overly-dynamic list, in which some proposals are going to discovered and added while some may be removed on the basis that the proposal is not notable enough. Seems like a good article idea on paper, but in my opinion, there really isn't a proper way to execute it. Waddles 🗩 🖉 02:37, 3 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, ✗plicit 08:53, 9 July 2022 (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.