Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/980s in Denmark

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. -Splash - tk 19:29, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

980s in Denmark[edit]

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

It doesn't really mention anything, does it? MrNiceGuy1113 (talk) 14:11, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know - does it? What policy are you citing? None that I can see. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 14:18, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Invalid AfD Nomination - You need to read the relevant AfD guidelines before making a nomination. The pages you have highlighted for deletion are under construction / in first stages of development. Olowe2011 (talk) 14:23, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - As an editing note, I wonder aloud rather it might not be better (and less controversial) to scrub all these decade-level pages and combine the info into something called 10th Century in Denmark or some such. Carrite (talk) 19:00, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep all. I suggest we discuss this set as a whole here, since this was the first one nominated. Does anyone know the formal process for that? I added some events to this one and to 950s in Denmark. Easy enough, which suggests a WP:BEFORE issue. Once they have been expanded a bit more and we get a sense for how large they are likely to become, we can perhaps consider a merge as suggested by Carrite. Aymatth2 (talk) 20:43, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There are certain to be enough notable things that happened in Denmark in a ten-year period to be listed here--at at the moment, enough are to justify the page. I wouldn't support making individual years in the early middle ages until we have filled in articles like this, & it is possible that the 10th century in a particular country may never reach that point. But decades certainly. WP is a structure and must be built. It doesn't hatch instantaneously. DGG ( talk ) 21:25, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Keep - The article is well-sourced, and functional as an encyclopedia entry. Northamerica1000^(talk) 23:24, 28 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Merge all into 10th century in Denmark. It would be easier to maintain the articles if they were organised by century, not by decade.--xanchester (t) 07:17, 29 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Denmark-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of History-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 17:30, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I started 10th century in Denmark and put "merge to" notices on the decade pages. We are deciding here whether the title "980s in Denmark" etc. should be allowed to exist. I would say "yes, without doubt", and do not sense much disagreement. This could probably be snowballed. The second question is whether the title should lead to a stand-alone article or to a broader "10th century in Denmark". I favor the latter, but it is a question of organization and convenience rather than existence. We should wait until this set of AfD's is closed, then give the "merge to" discussion another week at least before making a decision on that. Aymatth2 (talk) 01:51, 31 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Merge All decades into 10th century in Denmark.♦ Dr. ☠ Blofeld 14:31, 2 November 2012 (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.