Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/1953 12 Hours of Sebring

{{AFD help}}

:{{la|1=1953 12 Hours of Sebring}} – (View AfDView log | edits since nomination)

:({{Find sources AFD|title=1953 12 Hours of Sebring}})

WP:ROUTINE (motor)sports event. Nothing really of note happened. The article consists of a play-by-play, which isn't noteworthy itself. The remainder of the article is unexplained statistics. SWinxy (talk) 22:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)

• Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Motorsport and Florida. SWinxy (talk) 22:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
• Strong keep - Merging to 12 Hours of Sebring is undesirable per WP:NOMERGE point 1. Nomination seems to focus on the state of the article and not about the existence of sources; no evidence is presented that offline sources were checked in a WP:BEFORE. Classic case of AfD being used as cleanup. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  01:32, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• AfD is a completely valid venue for when editors think it fails NOT: WP:WHATISTOBEDONE. A check for sources is irrelevant, since the concern is not of notability, per BEFORE: {{tq|Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability}}. SWinxy (talk) 04:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• But you said in your nomination, {{tq|"Nothing really of note happened."}} How is that not a concern of notability? Regardless, If the concern is purely about the state of the article ({{tq|"The article consists of a play-by-play...The remainder of the article is unexplained statistics."}}) and not notability, then you're either using AfD as cleanup or a means to force others into expanding it (which doesn't fly in the face of WP:JUSTDOIT and WP:VOLUNTEER, respectively), in which case I support the below opinions that this be speedily closed. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  05:46, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• I didn't mean it as a notability thing in the sense of Wikipedia notability, but in terms of: 'nothing really happened, it was routine coverage.' I am not intending to force a cleanup. I am nominating it to be deleted. SWinxy (talk) 05:57, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• I disagree in the strongest terms that there should be no coverage whatsoever at any time on Wikipedia (which is what is implied by either nominating or !voting for deletion) on the very first race of the World Sportscar Championship, which has readily available online sources to establish notability, on top of likely a plethora of offline ones, all because of the article's current state (see the WP:POTENTIAL essay). I apologize if you feel that I cast any aspersions, was not my intention, but I do very much support a speedy close based on my understanding of this reply. This is a bad AfD (not in a dramatic sense, just absent of good). ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  06:19, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• So you're nominating it for deletion but not contesting its notability? What's going on here? 5225_C (talk • contributions) 07:11, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• Yes, as a failure of WP:NOT. SWinxy (talk) 22:34, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• From WP:WHATISTOBEDONE: {{tq|"When you wonder whether the rules given above are being violated, consider: 1. Modifying the content of an article (normal editing)."}} Was this considered? ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  01:41, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
• Not what? Not routine? Routine means everyday events without any significance, not any event that ever happened. A track day for the local auto club at Sebring is routine, an instance of one of the biggest endurance races in the world is not. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 02:38, 9 October 2023 (UTC)
• Strong and speedy keep - World championship edition of a major event. Someone with access to suitable archives would almost certainly be able to find WP:SIGCOV from contemporary sources, and likely from later ones given the historical significance of this race as the first ever round of the World Sportscar Championship. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 01:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• Speedy keep – Not the best race report I've ever seen but the 12 Hours of Sebring is obviously going to have ample coverage to write on, notwithstanding the additional significance of this event as HumanBodyPiloter5 mentioned. 5225_C (talk • contributions) 03:33, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• Note: Searching for the article title seems to bring up less useful results in a WP:BEFORE search than searching for the more naturalistic "1953 Sebring 12 Hours", which immediately brings up [https://www.autocar.co.uk/car-news/from-the-archive/motorsport-archive-day-1953-0 this retrospective article from the seventieth anniversary of the event] and [https://www.motorsportmagazine.com/archive/article/april-1953/35/american-victory-at-sebring/ this contemporary report from Motor Sport magazine]. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 03:35, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• I'd say that these two alone are enough for a clear GNG pass, ending any (apparent non-)concern about notability. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk)  05:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Events-related deletion discussions. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 04:57, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• Keep, definitely is notable enough to remain. GraziePrego (talk) 07:16, 8 October 2023 (UTC)
• Keep; the event's notability should go unquestioned. The article has problems, as do many others. It can be improved upon over time, as have many others... RegalZ8790 (talk) 02:35, 12 October 2023 (UTC)

{{clear}}

: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.