Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bryansky (rural locality)
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 speedy keep. It does serve a purpose. (non-admin closure) Freedoxm (talk · contribs) 00:21, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
Bryansky (rural locality)
[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!
- Bryansky (rural locality) (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log | edits since nomination)
- (Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)
List that serves no purpose. Only one rural locality has this name, others does not exist. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 13:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Lists and Russia. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 13:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose. The nomination is invalid. All of them exist or existed, just there are no articles written. (I am not sure they are individually notable, this is exactly why one needs a SET index to list them. Ymblanter (talk) 14:51, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- I doubt these articles will be written, as this list has existed for over a decade.
- It is completely useless to the readers. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:22, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- They do not need to be written. This is a SET index, it is perfectly fine to make SET indices which contain redlinks. Ymblanter (talk) 15:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- WP:SIA does not say anything about this. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- It says "A set index article (SIA) is a list article about a set of items of a specific type that also share the same (or similar) name". In fact, this is the first sentence of WP:SIA. I am not sure what else you want to see there. Ymblanter (talk) 16:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- WP:SIA does not say that its "perfectly fine to make SET indices which contain redlinks". WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 16:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- I think at this point I should stop answering because we are not going anywhere. I reiterate my strong opposition to the deletion and my argument that the nomination is baseless. Ymblanter (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Ok. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 18:00, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- I think at this point I should stop answering because we are not going anywhere. I reiterate my strong opposition to the deletion and my argument that the nomination is baseless. Ymblanter (talk) 17:46, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- WP:SIA does not say that its "perfectly fine to make SET indices which contain redlinks". WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 16:31, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- It says "A set index article (SIA) is a list article about a set of items of a specific type that also share the same (or similar) name". In fact, this is the first sentence of WP:SIA. I am not sure what else you want to see there. Ymblanter (talk) 16:18, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- WP:SIA does not say anything about this. WhoIsCentreLeft (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- They do not need to be written. This is a SET index, it is perfectly fine to make SET indices which contain redlinks. Ymblanter (talk) 15:38, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Strong oppose. The nomination is invalid. All of them exist or existed, just there are no articles written. (I am not sure they are individually notable, this is exactly why one needs a SET index to list them. Ymblanter (talk) 14:51, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Note - OP is wrong in claiming that only one village has this name. Several rural localities in Russia and in Ukraine (Crimea) bear the name - in fact, some are "missing" from the list. I do not believe we will get articles on any of those, to be honest, so I have added ILLs to the ones listed. For the record, I believe the list serves a purpose and would vote Keep. Ostalgia (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2025 (UTC)
- Keep per @Ymblanter. There have been places called this, the nominator should read the WP:NPLACE. Clear pass. Besides that, it seems that a WP:BEFORE check was not performed. AnonymousScholar49 (talk) 01:39, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
- Keep per @Ymblanter. Not a single valid point for deletion made by nominator, who misunderstands a range of guidelines and similar practices, including WP:NPLACE and the purposes of WP:SIA. I notice they've been suggested to review guidelines before making afd nominations, and I would encourage them to do so. Furthermore, wikipedia isn't on a deadline to write articles to fill in redlinks, nor is it useless to readers, on the contrary it's telling them that there are multiple places with this name and giving information on them. Spokoyni (talk) 08:02, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
- Keep, the current state of the article proves the nomination is just wrong. MarioGom (talk) 09:46, 2 May 2025 (UTC)
- I'm the author, but keep. I see no reason to pick one random set index for deletion out of many that exist and are totally fine within the set index articles framework.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 2, 2025; 15:21 (UTC)
- 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.