Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/2010 in Pakistan

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 nominator's primary concern has been addressed. The article is no longer empty. (non-admin closure) Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:13, 19 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 in Pakistan[edit]

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

Completely empty (please note it was completely empty when this nom started). Redundant article to Category:2010 in Pakistan. Dr. Blofeld 21:55, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per the existence of the category mentioned above. Tyrol5 [Talk] 22:38, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Pakistan-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 23:28, 12 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am of the belief that this article was prematurely created, as it has been empty for an elongated period of time. I believe it should be deleted and restored at a later date. Tyrol5 [Talk] 14:42, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep and add content. (I started doing so--it should have been done earlier) This will be appropriate regardless of the existence of the category. Categories and lists are complementary, and there is no reason not to have both. Lists have the particular advantage of providing some information about the material in which they appear, thus facilitating identification and browsing. Browsing is a key function of an encyclopedia. As a general rule, for topics like this, if there is a category, there should be a list. The argument used here would be reason to delete every Events in ... list in Wikipedia, and they are a well-established type of articles. Dr. B, if this is your intent, it might be better to start a general discussion elsewhere. DGG ( talk ) 00:33, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Its been empty for three months....!! Dr. Blofeld 11:43, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keep as part of a series (2006 in Pakistan, 2007 in Pakistan and so on). I've added a few things myself and it is easily expandable. It will also need to be referenced but I'm not doing that yet in case the vote goes against it. Keresaspa (talk) 02:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think we can now move on from the arguments about the article being empty as there is now plenty of content as added by DGG and myself. I also agree with DGG that the other issue of the category vs. article debate is a bigger one than this individual AFD nomination and that this is something that would need to be discussed somewhere else. Deletion was worth considering for the empty version that was initially nominated but that can no oonger apply although for me the nomination was still probably right as it provided the impetus to fix the problem. Keresaspa (talk) 18:06, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep The article/list was not empty when it was created, it contained a template which made it clear that it was part of a series and a quick check of one of the others would highlight examples of what could be added. The presence of categories does not prevent the existence of lists or similar, per WP:CLN. Someone another 19:25, 17 August 2010 (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.