Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Formula One Grand Prix Podiums

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. ‑Scottywong | yak _ 18:21, 25 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

List of Formula One Grand Prix Podiums

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

Unneccessary duplication/compilation of data which appears at List of Formula One Grand Prix winners, 1950 Formula One season, 1951 Formula One season, 1952 Formula One season etc Falcadore (talk) 01:04, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete on crimes against grammar. There is no apostrophe in 1950s, 1960s, etc. Lugnuts ^{Dick Laurent is dead} 07:57, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:46, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists of people-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 14:46, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per nom.QueenCake (talk) 17:08, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Are you guys even taking this nomination seriously? The nominator's argument quite blatantly fails WP:OTHERSTUFF and the first supporter's argument relates to something that could have been corrected in the time taken to write that argument. Tvx1 (talk) 17:55, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
So you believe we should have a list of winners as well as a list of podiums? Why not a list of top fives? Then we could have a list of top tens. Oooo, now we should have a list of just first and second. And aybe a list that just has the point scorers only. And...

Not only does OTHERSTUFF not apply (OTHERSTUFF refers to articles similar in concept, not duplication of content), but criteria 5 of WP:DEL-REASON - content forking speaks directly to this subject. --Falcadore (talk) 23:02, 18 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Did I vote "keep" here? No I didn't, so please do not accuse me of "believing" things. Regarding your recent argument, please read WP:RELAR. Tvx1 (talk) 18:44, 19 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The presence of a "?" is usually indicative of a question rather than an accusation. I was asking for a clarification of your comment, then adding illustration. I struggle to find how WP:RELAR applies as this is a bit closer than being related coverage, it's the same coverage. Essentially this would mean the content of List of Formula One Grand Prix winners is entirely encapsulated within List of Formula One Grand Prix Podiums. So this goes back to my original attempt at clarification. If a list of First places and First Second and Third places can exist as articles, what other variations can exist? If you would like to clarify your comment that would be appreciated. If you read more into it than that, then perhaps an "accusation" that a deletion request "not be treated seriously" and "blatantly fails" perhaps might sound something other than you intended. --Falcadore (talk) 07:17, 20 March 2014 (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.