Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roadfan (2nd nomination)

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 no consensus. Default to keep. I note that a considerable amount of information has been added to the dictionary definition that was nominated {[1]). As the AFD was no consensus, if the article does not further improve in a few months, it can always be revisited here at AFD. Neıl 龱 20:11, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Roadgeek

All-out dicdef. Also, that notable roadfans section is very unencyclopediac. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 14:49, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Delete as it seems any further information beyond the dicdef would be opinion only. CitiCat^♫ 16:38, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep. Notable hobby; various roadgeeks have been interviewed in media sources and thus reliable sources can be found; I know in particular that "The Georgia Roadgeek" (can't recall his real name) has been interviewed by local papers, along with a description of the hobby. See also Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Roadgeek, where this article, under another name, was nominated for AFD and closed with an overwhelming "keep". —Scott5114 ↗ [EXACT CHANGE ONLY] 20:17, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If kept, it should be moved back to roadgeek, since that's the term that gets the reliable sources (ignore the first from a Usenet mirror). --NE2 21:08, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Be it a notable hobby or not, it violates WP:DICDEF. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 16:12, 23 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to wiktionary or Delete. The condition of the previous AFD – however overwhelming it may have been – was that it be cleaned up. Given that the article has not been expanded since then, there doesn't seem to be much to say beyond the dictionary definition. -- Kéiryn (talk) 21:33, 22 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki to Wiktionary as "roadgeek", move the Wikipedia page back to roadgeek, and create a "soft redirect" to the Wiktionary entry. --NE2 03:29, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Roadgeek was nominated for deletion previously, with a result of "Keep and cleanup." The resulting improvements began with the deletion of the interesting and encyclopedic information about a fairly well documented hobby, removal of all related images, moving the article to a less notable title, followed by another AfD. Note that the current AfD is perfectly understandable and I do AGF. The article should be moved back to Roadgeek, should be restored to the longest version, and should have templates requesting improvement and references as appropriate. It would be better to use a title that applied to the hobby, rather than the hobbyists, I think. But "Roadgeeking," even with 4280 hits, doesn't seem quite right. Roadfan has about 7,000 hits, compared to 56,000 for Roadgeek, 132,000 for "road scholar" (many for roadscholar.org, a travel learning program), and 14,000 for "roads scholar" (many for state and federal highway-related training programs).--Hjal (talk) 04:11, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep per precedent and per notability. --Rschen7754 (T C) 19:38, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- As notable as it may be, it still violates WP:DICDEF. Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 19:41, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Very Strong Delete per above, there is no consensus on where it should be keep or not and besides Wikipedia not a dictionary of anything. --75.47.158.192 (talk) 19:48, 27 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The article has been restored to encyclopedic content with additional material and references. It's not GA, but it's good enough to drop this AfD.--Hjal (talk) 09:53, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Transwiki transwiki to wiktionary, WP:DICDEF A dmrb♉ltz (t • c • log) 21:16, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Keep as a notable hobby. Does not seem to be a dicdef to me. Prior AFD result was a clear keep. Gtstricky^{Talk or C} 14:02, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki per ED2. No info lost, and is in appropriate place.Yobmod (talk) 14:12, 30 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Transwiki - Dicdef where it belongs TALKIN PIE EATER REVIEW ME 15:19, 30 June 2008 (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.