Login
Login

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common pub names in Australia

: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 delete. Flowerparty☀ 00:13, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

=[[Common pub names in Australia]]=

:{{la|Common pub names in Australia}} ([{{fullurl:Common pub names in Australia|wpReason={{urlencode: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Common pub names in Australia}}&action=delete}} delete]) – (View AfD)(View log)

it is difficult to reference such a topic in an encyclopaedia, how does one define "common"...it leaves it open to original research to what qualifies. LibStar (talk) 06:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete The first entry, Commercial Hotel, links to disambiguation page of ten "Commercial Hotels", all of which are in the United States, none in Australia, furthermore all but one are red links. The next blue link is to another disambiguation page, with three entries, one in Australia and two in the U.S. So the list is not even what it purports to be. Clearly this is unreferenced original research on a non-notable topic. Start from the basics: is the subject of the article notable? Is the information verifiable? Or is it, as the nominator suggests, original research? (No, no, yes.) Drawn Some (talk) 06:58, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Note: This debate has been included in the list of Australia-related deletion discussions. —Grahame (talk) 08:48, 19 June 2009 (UTC)
  • Comment It is hard to justify keeping this list in its current state, but the topic of naming conventions for Australian pubs is clearly notable and encyclopedic. If sources can be found a very decent article could be written. Heaven knows it could be well illustrated! -- Mattinbgn\talk 08:59, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

:*:Most common words in English seems to get by OK without a formal definition of "common". -- Mattinbgn\talk 09:00, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

:::An article needs reliable sources to support the notability of the topic as well as to verify the content. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a justification for this article's existence. (But I encourage you to nominate the other article for deletion if it is not notable and verifiable.) Drawn Some (talk) 13:41, 19 June 2009 (UTC)

::::I don't recall asking for this article to be kept ... Mattinbgn\talk 12:06, 22 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Speedy Keep We do not require exact definitions for common words like common. Please use some common sense. As for notability, please see the [http://books.google.co.uk/books?q=Common+%22pub+names%22+Australia&btnG=Search+Books abundant sources]. Colonel Warden (talk) 12:59, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

: the reference you give doesn't actually objectively determine which are the most common names. this is unlike something like "common baby names" which can be obtained reliably from a birth registry. LibStar (talk) 13:08, 24 June 2009 (UTC)

  • Delete I don't know of many pubs in Australia with websites, but we don't need a list as subjective and non-encyclopaedic as this. Perhaps more suitable to an article like Pubs in Australian culture if someone can be bothered to write it. \ Backslash Forwardslash / {talk} 23:32, 26 June 2009 (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.