Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Index of physics articles (!$@): Difference between revisions

Revision as of 23:53, 8 March 2013

Latest revision as of 10:43, 25 March 2023

(24 intermediate revisions by 11 users not shown)

Line 1:

<div class="boilerplate metadata afd vfd xfd-closed" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">

:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''

<!--Template:Afd top

Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->

The result was '''keep'''. '''[[User:Postdlf|postdlf]]''' (''[[User talk:Postdlf|talk]]'') 17:08, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

===[[Index of physics articles (!$@)]]===

{{REMOVE THIS TEMPLATE WHEN CLOSING THIS AfD|?}}

:{{la|Index of physics articles (!$@)}} – (<includeonly>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Index of physics articles (!$@)|View AfD]]</includeonly><noinclude>[[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2013 March 8#{{anchorencode:Index of physics articles (!$@)}}|View log]]</noinclude>{{int:dot-separator}} <span class="plainlinks">[http://toolserver.org/~snottywong/cgi-bin/votecounter.cgi?page=Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Index_of_physics_articles_(!$@) Stats]</span>)

Line 40 ⟶ 46:

* '''Keep All''' - While I wouldn't advocate anyone commit the massive amount of time necessary to create and maintain such an apparatus, it is clear that this is very well done and fulfills a valid navigational function, which is the key thing. [[User:Carrite|Carrite]] ([[User talk:Carrite|talk]]) 21:24, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

*'''Keep''' or possibly meld into one [[Index of physics articles]] article. Indices of science-related articles on Wikipedia are numerous; [[:Category:Indexes_of_science_articles]] lists 37 of them. Why pick on physics? If it is because the index is broken into separate articles, we could meld them into one. If it is not the physics index articles in particular, but indices in general that you think are useless, then this is something to bring up on a policy forum, not AfD. As a side note, there is no AfD notice on the 'A' page. --[[User:Mark viking|Mark viking]] ([[User talk:Mark viking|talk]]) 22:14, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

::Note that these indexes appear to have originally existed as a single index named "Index of physics articles", but was apparently split in an attempt to make it more easily readable and maintainable. The common objection to these indexes is not related to the number of articles they take up, but to the huge maintenance overhead that they entail. If indexes like this exist and are approved by consensus, then article creators should be duty-bound to add their new article to the index, which becomes maintenance creep. Also what defines "Physics-related" as the appropriate point in the category nesting to create a flat list? Why not "Science-related"? Alternatively why not "Quantum Physics-related" and "Computational Physics-related" and..... ? A far better solution would be an addition to the MediaWiki software that allows any category to be viewed in flat-form with one button click. &mdash;[[User:Gorgan almighty|gorgan_almighty]] ([[User talk:Gorgan almighty|talk]]) 12:20, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

:::Even if such an index is not complete, it can still be useful, just like Wikipedia as a whole. That button would be really nice to have, but that's not decided here. It would also need to be more than just a one-click button, since walking down the category tree far enough starting from [[:Category:Physics]] you can easily get to completely different topics. &mdash;&thinsp;[[User:Hhhippo|<span style="color:darkblue; font-family:times;">'''H<small>HHIPPO</small>'''</span>]] 20:51, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

*'''Undecided'''. As they stand now, the lists don't do anything better than categories. There are also several problems just from a cursory examination. Physicists don't need to be included individually when there is already a [[List of physicists]], and they definitely shouldn't be ordered by first name. Also, articles like [[zinc sulfide]] and [[zirconium alloy]] really belong in the [[Index of chemistry articles]] (which also lists scientists by first name). [[User:Clarityfiend|Clarityfiend]] ([[User talk:Clarityfiend|talk]]) 23:53, 8 March 2013 (UTC)

:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Science|list of Science-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 00:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)</small>

:<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This debate has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Lists|list of Lists-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Gene93k|• Gene93k]] ([[User talk:Gene93k|talk]]) 00:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)</small>

*'''Keep all''' Passes [[WP:CLN]], no policy-based reason for deletion has been advanced, since "redundant to category" is both a) not a policy-based reason, and b) not true--list articles maintain past revisions of their content in history, categories do not. [[User:Jclemens|Jclemens]] ([[User talk:Jclemens|talk]]) 07:07, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

*'''Keep''' The nomination is absurd because lists may be hierarchical and these examples form a simple hierarchy with the main [[Index of physics articles]] being the parent. [[User:Colonel Warden|Warden]] ([[User talk:Colonel Warden|talk]]) 12:16, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

*'''Keep'''. Apart from the aforementioned, the lists also help to monitor changes to physics articles using [[Special:RecentChangesLinked|Related changes]]. For this purpose a single list would be even better, and there was one until October 2012, but it was split into the present pages since it had grown to nearly 400 kB. &mdash;&thinsp;[[User:Hhhippo|<span style="color:darkblue; font-family:times;">'''H<small>HHIPPO</small>'''</span>]] 16:49, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

*'''Keep''' as the creator of the majority of these articles (I did not create [[Index of physics articles]]). The reason these lists were originally split was due to the extreme size of the list if all of these entries were on the same article; as mentioned above, the size of the articles would have been about 400kB. And since the list is not breaking any types of policies (as mentioned above), I do not see why these articles need to be deleted. [[User:Steel1943|Steel1943]] ([[User talk:Steel1943|talk]]) 19:09, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

:*'''Note'''. At the present time, these articles are not in [[:Category:Physics]]. However, they are currently in [[:Category:Index of physics articles]]. That should be noted, regardless of the outcome. [[User:Steel1943|Steel1943]] ([[User talk:Steel1943|talk]]) 19:13, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

:::I put them there since [[:Category:Physics]] requires diffusion. I don't see the connection to this AfD though. &mdash;&thinsp;[[User:Hhhippo|<span style="color:darkblue; font-family:times;">'''H<small>HHIPPO</small>'''</span>]] 20:51, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

::::I don't either. In fact, I thought the transition was a good idea. Just needed to point it out since that category could be affected, depending on the outcome of this AFD. [[User:Steel1943|Steel1943]] ([[User talk:Steel1943|talk]]) 21:28, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

* '''Keep''' – The point of the {{tl|orphan}} template appears to be to promote Wikipedia interconnectivity. An index like this is one way to interconnect articles by subject matter; some of which may otherwise be orphans. Hence, I think this index should be retained in some form. [[User:Praemonitus|Praemonitus]] ([[User talk:Praemonitus|talk]]) 22:27, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

**That is what categories are for. No need to keep redundant lists just so articles aren't orphaned. [[User:Viridae|Viridae]][[User talk:Viridae|'''<small>^{DON'T PANIC}</small>''']] 23:34, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

*** Categories are not counted in the link tally. Thus they are not useful for the purpose I stated. [[User:Praemonitus|Praemonitus]] ([[User talk:Praemonitus|talk]]) 02:27, 14 March 2013 (UTC)

*'''Delete''' all per gorgan_almighty. This is what Categories are for. [[User:Viridae|Viridae]][[User talk:Viridae|'''<small>^{DON'T PANIC}</small>''']] 23:34, 12 March 2013 (UTC)

::As explained further above, and in the already mentioned [[WP:CLN]], categories and indices are ''not'' the same. We should keep these index pages until we have another solution providing the same functionality. &mdash;&thinsp;[[User:Hhhippo|<span style="color:darkblue; font-family:times;">'''H<small>HHIPPO</small>'''</span>]] 18:04, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

*'''Keep''' per past precedent and [[User:Colonel Warden|Warden]]. —'''[[User:Theopolisme|<span style="color: #232323;">Theopolisme</span>]] <span style="color: #4F4F4F;">([[User talk:Theopolisme|<span style="color: #4F4F4F;">talk</span>]])</span>''' 04:13, 15 March 2013 (UTC)

:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.'' <!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>