Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Foot in Mouth award

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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 ViridaeTalk 10:34, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Foot in Mouth award

Foot in Mouth award (edit|talk|history|links|watch|logs) – (View log)

Unencyclopedic list of quotes with almost no content attached, possible candidate for wikiquote but not here. Vicarious 01:15, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

  • Keep - this award is widely quoted, and is probably the most notable award of its type. - Richardcavell 01:22, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge to Plain English Campaign. ObtuseAngle 01:34, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Merge. Bi 06:01, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Although I'm not opposed to a merge, I'm not sure what there is to merge, there's only one line of material in the article, the rest is quotes with brief intros. Vicarious 06:39, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
The existence of the award would be a good place to start, since the Plain English Campaign article doesn't even mention it. A list of winners wouldn't be out of place, and if the quotes can be sourced, they might even fit. ObtuseAngle 15:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as internationally famous, and expand and improve. SmokeyJoe 12:59, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep as per SmokeyJoe Jules1975 15:25, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete A list of quotesm this does not belong on wikipedia.Tellyaddict 16:28, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete and add the link (http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/footinmouth.htm) to Plain English Campaign#Further reading if it's really that important. All the article is is a near-exact copy of that page anyway. - Pious7 18:12, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete per nominator, not much value here. /Blaxthos 23:43, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Delete not much valuable content to merge. --Nick—Contact/Contribs 23:49, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep not because of the current content (which indeed can mostly go), but because the award itself is notable enough to merit an entry with other content (btw sending the list of quotes to wikiquote is imho a good idea). Eldar 00:24, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • keep This is the name that people know, rather than the name for the organization that gives the awards.DGG 05:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep per the following coverage in BBC, The Register, CBC, People's Daily, ABC, China Daily, and many more that could easily be found if desired. -- Black Falcon 07:08, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
    • Incorporated. The sources have been added to the article at various junctions. -- Black Falcon 07:28, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
      • I never questioned that this was a real thing, but there are large amounts of material that are factual but still don't belong on wikipedia, namely the content on Wikipedia's many sister projects. Vicarious 03:08, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Transwiki to Wikiquote (I've changed my opinion). They're all quotes except the first sentence, but they do have notability. - Pious7 00:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
Can we leave a redirect to Wikiquote? SmokeyJoe 01:38, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Keep It's apparently a real award and has gotten real coverage. Clearly meets notability. If this were a list of movies winning an award there would be little debate me thinks. --Hobit 02:19, 12 March 2007 (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.