Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of nightclubs in Sweden

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. postdlf (talk) 19:40, 20 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

List of nightclubs in Sweden

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

WP:NOTTRAVEL and WP:NOTYELLOW. Wikipedia is not a directory for tourism Ajf773 (talk) 04:12, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 04:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sweden-related deletion discussions. Ajf773 (talk) 04:45, 30 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - per WP:NOTYELLOW; also see WP:SALAT; I can't see any evidence of how a stand-alone list could be justified Spiderone 10:20, 3 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Keep, obviously. Please see wp:CLT. There is a category for nightclubs. It is sensible to have a list for them, to be able to include pictures and references and redlinks for notable ones where we don't have articles yet. Is it the deletion nominator's contention that there are not enough Swedish ones to justify a separate list-article from a worldwide List of nightclubs? They could make a merger proposal I suppose, but obviously we can have a big list of nightclubs. There have been many notable nightclubs in world history. --doncram 01:59, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Read the initial reasons for deletion. Wikipedia isn't a night-club directory.Ajf773 (talk) 07:33, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  - In general, it doesn't help "win" AFDs for the deletion nominator to berate commenters. Read what I said and what I linked to. And I read WP:SALAT which does not prohibit there being a split-out list, in fact it talks about the process of splitting out lists. I added two pictures to this list-article and now (if not before) there is more material than is comfortably merged back into List of nightclubs. The list-article links to at least four notable Swedish nightclubs (i.e. that have articles). There could be productive discussion at its Talk page about sourcing requirements for redlinks in the list-article, to establish some standard for list-item notability for this list, but that is not for AFD. Wikipedia has many list-articles, without becoming merely a directory of mosques or of Elks buildings or courthouses or whatever. Has the deletion nominator tried doing any searching on nightclubs in Sweden? How about doing some searching and add some sourced material so that you can feel better about the quality of the list-article, instead of forcing other editors to debate about the basic question of existence. Nightclubs exist in Sweden, and some of them are individually notable, too. --doncram 21:02, 4 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]
    - Wikipedia is not compulsory and given this article (and several others I have nominated) fails several content policies, my nomination remains. All I see new to the article is two photos and a brief blurb for two of the few list entries that also exist, nothing substantial. Ajf773 (talk)
      - Sounds like the deletion nominator fails to understand that wp:AFDISNOTFORCLEANUP. --do ncr am 17:22, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is for DELETION. Not only cleanup. As if I have not made myself clear enough. Ajf773 (talk) 17:31, 5 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right, the deletion nominator requests deletion for "reasons" that IMO could possibly justify tagging for cleanup, but which are not reasons for deletion. But in fact WP:NOTTRAVEL and WP:NOTYELLOW do not apply, as the list-article does not include phone numbers or street addresses. Wikipedia obviously can contain a world-wide list of notable nightclubs and that list can be subdivided. --do ncr am 01:57, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This stand alone list fails WP:LISTN IMO. There are only three list entries which have articles (previous five although these two were removed by me as they did not belong). Ajf773 (talk) 02:03, 6 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:01, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 15:02, 8 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Keep per WP:LISTOUTCOMES pursuant to the guideline on categories, lists, and navigation templates with emphasis on WP:NOTDUP. I have added interlanguage links and expanded with a few entries from sv:Kategori:Nattklubbar i Sverige and subcats. WP:NOTYELLOW is cited as a reason for deletion, but as no contact information is included in the list, WP:NOTYELLOW does not apply. Likewise there is nothing remotely travel guide'ish about the list and WP:NOTTRAVEL does not apply. — Sam Sailor 16:36, 15 December 2016 (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.