Redirect to:
This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
|
an interest. Shortcuts WP:INDISCRIMINATEWP:INDISCRIMINATE WP:RAWDATAWP:RAWDATA To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:32, 12 February 2018 (UTC) Delete per WP:RAWDATA. No redirect, as the title is ungrammatical (prices aren't sold). Clarityfiend...
Click to read more »discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 01:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC) Strong delete per WP:RAWDATA and completely unsourced. Ajf773 (talk) 01:33, 29 January 2019 (UTC) Note:...
Click to read more »for deletion/List of 2008 United States EPA fuel economy ratingsPer WP:RAWDATA and Wikipedia is not an auto buyers guide - especially for products from...
Click to read more »WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable list. Seems to fall under WP:RAWDATA, as an indiscriminate collection of information –DMartin 20:23, 29 November...
Click to read more »news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) As per WP:RAWDATA, this seems to be an indiscriminate list of data with no context and poor...
Click to read more »(books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Per WP:RAWDATA. Only a list with no context and no indication of notability. Tvx1 17:04...
Click to read more »Lightburst (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Delete. Completely unsourced and WP:RAWDATA. Ajf773 (talk) 19:00, 3 March 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been...
Click to read more »included. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 14:52, 4 April 2015 (UTC) Delete per WP:IINFO / WP:RAWDATA. Might have instructional use at Wikibooks, but not here. --Animalparty--...
Click to read more »for deletion/List of 2008 United States EPA fuel economy ratings. Per WP:RAWDATA and Wikipedia is not an auto buyers guide - especially for products from...
Click to read more »for deletion/List of 2008 United States EPA fuel economy ratingsPer WP:RAWDATA and Wikipedia is not an auto buyers guide - especially for products from...
Click to read more »I propose merging into methane as this page fundamentally violates WP:RAWDATA, which states the following which disqualifies this page: There are no...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:05, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »(books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Per WP:RAWDATA. Content doesn't match source and is only relevant for one particular year...
Click to read more »haplogroups by populations, now deleted). Content is a textbook WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA violation itself. Appears to be a mere restatement of the supplementary...
Click to read more »Unsourced. Trivial and non-notable. Fails WP:GNG. Also see WP:SPORTCRIT & WP:RAWDATA. Full of redlinks and broken templates. Created as part of a large swath...
Click to read more »14:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC) Delete this is an excessive amount of WP:RAWDATA. Major League Lacrosse may be a redirect target. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:37...
Click to read more »scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) WP:NOTDIR and WP:RAWDATA. This is a list of handicapping/normalization constants for yacht racing...
Click to read more »scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:GNG and WP:RAWDATA. There's nothing notable about an individual weather radar installation...
Click to read more »serves as only promotion. Fails at least WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 14:23, 20 August 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »subject, but the bulk of this article is basically just a bunch of WP:RAWDATA. TompaDompa (talk) 12:58, 1 February 2025 (UTC) Merge to The Adventures...
Click to read more »serves as only promotion. Fails at least WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 20:40, 19 August 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Comes under WP:RAWDATA as a table with no context. A summary of this could easily be included...
Click to read more »article. Nyttend (talk) 21:36, 21 December 2013 (UTC) Delete - fails WP:RAWDATA.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 01:09, 22 December 2013 (UTC) Delete...
Click to read more »statistics for the qualifiers of a competition. Delete per WP:NOT as WP:RAWDATA. Odie5533 (talk) 20:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC) The following is a comment...
Click to read more »news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) This is WP:RAWDATA; Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia...
Click to read more »of X in fiction quickly turns into an indiscriminate accumulation of WP:RAWDATA (the 2008 essay WP:CARGO explains rather well how and why this is a problem...
Click to read more »be quite difficult to support. Fails WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 14:41, 22 September 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »lacking any context or assertion of notability. Fails WP:LISTN and WP:RAWDATA. - MrX 12:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...
Click to read more »references. Never current. Fails at least WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »large swath of pages by a single user who has since left. Also see WP:RAWDATA. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:47, 4 January 2017 (UTC)...
Click to read more »source in. # No return value. sub FetchWikiSource { my ($url, $src_p); my (@rawdata, $ridx, $sidx, $thisline); my ($insource, $done); $url = $_[0]; $src_p...
Click to read more »encyclopedia to catalog unimportant bits of data and tv show statistics. WP:RAWDATA and WP:IINFO here. Tarc (talk) 15:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC) Delete strange...
Click to read more »15 January 2018 (UTC) Delete - I agree, this somewhat fails WP:NOT (WP:RAWDATA and WP:NOTSTATSBOOK) and doesn't really provide the kind of context for...
Click to read more »but the list itself feels like it's a problem for WP:NOTCATALOG and WP:RAWDATA. The main reference of the article is an archived forum post, which is...
Click to read more »do think a valid nomination could be made for this page, perhaps as WP:RAWDATA, so maybe you could just elaborate and talk about the content specifically...
Click to read more »reasons as List of artists who have performed at the Colston Hall; WP:RAWDATA and WP:IINFO. Wikipedia is not a directory of every band or singer that...
Click to read more »fork of the main article, leap year; the list itself is unnecessary WP:RAWDATA. Having explained that a leap year is any number divisible by 4, except...
Click to read more »images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Definitely not in compliance with WP:RAWDATA. Nuke it, and start over so the article can be remade as a more encyclopedic...
Click to read more »to support. Seems to me it fails WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, and WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 16:14, 1 October 2019 (UTC) Delete I have not found evidence...
Click to read more »whatsoever. Ajf773 (talk) 20:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC) Delete non-notable WP:RAWDATA; also applies to List of Farm Names in Østfold. The author has commented...
Click to read more »be quite difficult to support. Fails WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »(talk) 21:12, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Delete: per nomination, fails WP:GNG, WP:RAWDATA, and likely WP:NEXIST. Junosangleave a message 11:41, 23 July 2026 (UTC)...
Click to read more »and List of artists who have performed at the Colston Hall; this is WP:RAWDATA; Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia...
Click to read more »Australia. Qwerty123M (talk) 11:48, 3 July 2026 (UTC) Merge – As per WP:RAWDATA, this doesn't need a standalone article. FaviFake (talk) 16:35, 3 July...
Click to read more »delete. power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC) Delete per WP:RAWDATA. Ajf773 (talk) 21:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...
Click to read more »LISTN, the applicable notability guideline, and it likely runs afoul of RAWDATA as well. Rebbing 02:41, 3 December 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...
Click to read more »list under WP:LISTPURP. Also goes against key principles of WP:IINFO (WP:RAWDATA). Also, inclusion criteria are unclear. Ed Sheeran might well be born in...
Click to read more »has made few or no other edits outside this topic. These lists are WP:RAWDATA. That's useful for researchers, but not so much for the general public...
Click to read more »coronavirus pandemic data/China medical cases by province, basically WP:RAWDATA. Reywas92Talk 05:17, 19 March 2020 (UTC) Comment This article has the daily...
Click to read more »create and maintain Smokefoot (talk) 01:02, 2 August 2018 (UTC) Delete - WP:RAWDATA or WP:NOTTEXTBOOK seem to apply. Also, I guess we've been having this discussion...
Click to read more »produced. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:31, 21 July 2022 (UTC) Delete per WP:RAWDATA. It's unsourced anyway and probably original research. Ajf773 (talk) 09:12...
Click to read more »WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Stemming from this discussion, this is WP:RAWDATA; Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia...
Click to read more »notable. I'm not sure why Wikipedia needs to copy-and-paste so much WP:RAWDATA from the Billboard website, without any outside references or additional...
Click to read more »article only serves as a collection of TV ratings. WP:NOTSTATS and WP:RAWDATA apply here. Ajf773 (talk) 20:07, 29 July 2020 (UTC) Keep - Valid article...
Click to read more »articles contravene NOT on at least three counts: WP:NOTMIRROR, WP:NOTDIR, WP:RAWDATA, as they are simple listings of primary source data. There is also, as...
Click to read more »and List of artists who have performed at the Colston Hall; this is WP:RAWDATA; Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia...
Click to read more »better. Therefore, nominating for deletion due to WP:NOTDIRECTORY, WP:RAWDATA, WP:RS failures. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2026...
Click to read more »Square Thing (talk) 17:51, 27 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »been doing) 01:42, 6 January 2017 (UTC) Delete per WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:RAWDATA. Icebob99 (talk) 01:45, 6 January 2017 (UTC) Keep. Pro lacrosse may not...
Click to read more »although you can find sources for some (e.g. [1] and [2]) WP:IINFO/WP:RAWDATA - Wikipedia is not an exhaustive directory of every single act that has...
Click to read more »or else I won't see it) 11:25, 3 July 2026 (UTC) Delete fails WP:NOT/WP:RAWDATA - article is purely data extracted from a UN database (Conference on Trade...
Click to read more »That's not really a great reason to merge, but if you remove all the WP:RAWDATA and uncited stuff, the article is short enough to be merged per WP:SHORTTEXT...
Click to read more »Square Thing (talk) 17:49, 27 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »Square Thing (talk) 17:52, 27 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:00, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »incomplete and out of date. There are strong problems for WP:NOTCATALOG and WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 02:35, 9 November 2019 (UTC) I am also nominating the...
Click to read more »Square Thing (talk) 16:33, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:59, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:02, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:06, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 19:58, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »Ajf773 (talk) 08:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »Ajf773 (talk) 08:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »January 2014 (UTC) Delete per NinjaRobotPirate: it's a List made up of WP:RAWDATA that's trying to be an article about a "phenomenon". Per WP:LISTN, this...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:08, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »Square Thing (talk) 17:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »Square Thing (talk) 17:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »website. Trivial and non-notable. Fails WP:GNG. Also see WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:RAWDATA. Full of redlinks and some have broken templates. Created as part of a...
Click to read more »even part of the formal published (and peer reviewed) paper. This is WP:RAWDATA, an excessive listing of statistics drawn by OR from PRIMARY sources. Agricolae...
Click to read more »the debate was DELETE. -Splashtalk 02:48, 7 February 2006 (UTC) Template:Rawdata (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) Delete — Ill-conceived and...
Click to read more »WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Wikipedia is not a repository for data as per WP:RAWDATA - not encyclopaedic content Cardiffbear88 (talk) 23:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)...
Click to read more »useful in Wikipedia. --RaviC (talk) 23:34, 8 July 2017 (UTC) Delete per WP:RAWDATA/WP:NOTSTATS this is a pretty clear cut case of a big listing of raw information...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »(talk) 14:25, 27 November 2020 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTREPOSITORY and WP:RAWDATA, with no prejudice against creating an article on the digits of pi containing...
Click to read more »scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) This is just WP:RAWDATA formatted into a table... I don't think there's much more to say. I have...
Click to read more »that policy as it is very specific to only these circumstances: data or RAWDATA (which this isn't), summary-only descriptions of works (which this also...
Click to read more »where his fifers are discussed as a set or group, so fails WP:NLIST, WP:RAWDATA. Also, note that User talk:Vibhijain who created this list has been blocked...
Click to read more »exemplify? Taking a look at a sample of the entries, I see a collection of WP:RAWDATA about fiction. TompaDompa (talk) 01:16, 15 December 2024 (UTC) At least...
Click to read more »it is that the article consists of an indiscriminate collection of WP:RAWDATA (the 2008 essay WP:CARGO explains rather well how and why this is a problem...
Click to read more »redirected. BOZ (talk) 03:19, 13 October 2019 (UTC) @Vulcan's Forge: See WP:RAWDATA for why that argument doesn't hold weight. Wikipedia cannot simply have...
Click to read more »Wikipedia:Reference desk added 19 October 2017, archived 22 November 2017 WP:RAWDATA and sports practice added 25 October 2017, archived 23 November 2017 New...
Click to read more »other. Just like every other highway interchange in the world. See WP:RAWDATA. Being able to find WP:RS is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition...
Click to read more »cases (talk · history · transclusions · logs · subpages) Excessively long, WP:RAWDATA, WP:NOTNEWS. Darylgolden(talk) Ping when replying 03:34, 3 April 2020 (UTC)...
Click to read more »that policy as it is very specific to only these circumstances: data or RAWDATA (which this isn't), summary-only descriptions of works (which this also...
Click to read more »is useful and has a variety of references. It also does not violate WP:RAWDATA because contains sufficient explanatory text, more text can easily be added...
Click to read more »for deletion/List of 2008 United States EPA fuel economy ratings. Per WP:RAWDATA and Wikipedia is not an auto buyers guide - especially for products from...
Click to read more »online one would call it content farming. It is the assembly of pure WP:RAWDATA by way of WP:Original research at the whims of Wikipedia editors who have...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:03, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »the weekly "update" of episode numbers (even with sourcing), I think WP:RAWDATA can be invoked as a reason to reject that. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 21:13...
Click to read more »this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC) Delete as WP:RAWDATA. I'm also unable to figure out exactly what source was used. There's an...
Click to read more »was reliable, which the source appears not to be). May also violate WP:RAWDATA (Random thought: could the data be turned into a chart and used in another...
Click to read more »news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) This is WP:RAWDATA; Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. Wikipedia...
Click to read more »regarding airports that perhaps are running afoul of WP:NOTTRAVEL and WP:RAWDATA. I am posting here as the previous one on the WP:AIRPORTS talk page has...
Click to read more »(UTC) @Gronk Oz: This would seem to cross over into the ideas behind WP:RAWDATA at some point, though. A recent example, Julia Chan, comes to mind. Her...
Click to read more »how this happened but I'm supposing that the original prohibition of WP:RAWDATA has been nobbled by a psephology wonk. From a policy POV, I'll have to...
Click to read more »1 December 2017 (UTC) Delete not an encyclopedic topic, a bunch of WP:RAWDATA that is primary-sourced. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:11, 2 December 2017 (UTC)...
Click to read more »unreferenced planned events, products, or releases Raw data WP:NOTDB WP:RAWDATA The indiscriminate listing of data Directory WP:NOTDIRECTORY WP:NOTDIR...
Click to read more », is a good thing for the most part. Now, if we could just enforce WP:RAWDATA instead of supporting the recording of every poll or vote, goal or basket...
Click to read more »Village pump Policy Technical Proposals Idea lab WMF Miscellaneous Village pump (policy) archive This page contains discussions that have been archived...
Click to read more »online one would call it content farming. It is the assembly of pure WP:RAWDATA by way of WP:Original research at the whims of Wikipedia editors who have...
Click to read more »worst, bring to AfD (per something along WP:NOTNEWS, WP:NOTDIR and/or WP:RAWDATA). Keφr 19:56, 19 November 2013 (UTC) Note: I'm just jumping in here to...
Click to read more »WP:RAWDATA article, which text isn't sustainable on it's own or would better find it's place in the primary article, does not make it not-a-WP:RAWDATA article...
Click to read more »articles contravene NOT on at least three counts: WP:NOTMIRROR, WP:NOTDIR, WP:RAWDATA, as they are simple listings of primary source data. There is also, as...
Click to read more »WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Non-notable list. Seems to fall under WP:RAWDATA, as an indiscriminate collection of information –DMartin 20:23, 29 November...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:04, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »Lightburst (talk) 21:43, 2 March 2020 (UTC) Delete. Completely unsourced and WP:RAWDATA. Ajf773 (talk) 19:00, 3 March 2020 (UTC) Note: This discussion has been...
Click to read more »discussions. The Mighty Glen (talk) 15:32, 12 February 2018 (UTC) Delete per WP:RAWDATA. No redirect, as the title is ungrammatical (prices aren't sold). Clarityfiend...
Click to read more »news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) As per WP:RAWDATA, this seems to be an indiscriminate list of data with no context and poor...
Click to read more »included. 野狼院ひさし u/t/c 14:52, 4 April 2015 (UTC) Delete per WP:IINFO / WP:RAWDATA. Might have instructional use at Wikibooks, but not here. --Animalparty--...
Click to read more »(books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Per WP:RAWDATA. Only a list with no context and no indication of notability. Tvx1 17:04...
Click to read more »discussions. Bakazaka (talk) 01:18, 29 January 2019 (UTC) Strong delete per WP:RAWDATA and completely unsourced. Ajf773 (talk) 01:33, 29 January 2019 (UTC) Note:...
Click to read more »produced. Clarityfiend (talk) 07:31, 21 July 2022 (UTC) Delete per WP:RAWDATA. It's unsourced anyway and probably original research. Ajf773 (talk) 09:12...
Click to read more »statistics for the qualifiers of a competition. Delete per WP:NOT as WP:RAWDATA. Odie5533 (talk) 20:48, 2 December 2012 (UTC) The following is a comment...
Click to read more »with WP:PROPORTION and WP:RAWDATA, which is wrong. In the interest of avoiding repetition, my explanation for how WP:RAWDATA and WP:PROPORTION apply can...
Click to read more »large swath of pages by a single user who has since left. Also see WP:RAWDATA. Zackmann08 (Talk to me/What I been doing) 19:47, 4 January 2017 (UTC)...
Click to read more »images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Definitely not in compliance with WP:RAWDATA. Nuke it, and start over so the article can be remade as a more encyclopedic...
Click to read more »Unsourced. Trivial and non-notable. Fails WP:GNG. Also see WP:SPORTCRIT & WP:RAWDATA. Full of redlinks and broken templates. Created as part of a large swath...
Click to read more »notable. I'm not sure why Wikipedia needs to copy-and-paste so much WP:RAWDATA from the Billboard website, without any outside references or additional...
Click to read more »January 2014 (UTC) Delete per NinjaRobotPirate: it's a List made up of WP:RAWDATA that's trying to be an article about a "phenomenon". Per WP:LISTN, this...
Click to read more »useful in Wikipedia. --RaviC (talk) 23:34, 8 July 2017 (UTC) Delete per WP:RAWDATA/WP:NOTSTATS this is a pretty clear cut case of a big listing of raw information...
Click to read more »15 January 2018 (UTC) Delete - I agree, this somewhat fails WP:NOT (WP:RAWDATA and WP:NOTSTATSBOOK) and doesn't really provide the kind of context for...
Click to read more »has made few or no other edits outside this topic. These lists are WP:RAWDATA. That's useful for researchers, but not so much for the general public...
Click to read more »delete. power~enwiki (π, ν) 01:59, 27 August 2020 (UTC) Delete per WP:RAWDATA. Ajf773 (talk) 21:22, 27 August 2020 (UTC) The above discussion is preserved...
Click to read more »references. Never current. Fails at least WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 17:03, 11 September 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »CAPTAIN RAJU(T) 20:08, 24 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »LISTN, the applicable notability guideline, and it likely runs afoul of RAWDATA as well. Rebbing 02:41, 3 December 2017 (UTC) Note: This debate has been...
Click to read more »14:48, 29 November 2017 (UTC) Delete this is an excessive amount of WP:RAWDATA. Major League Lacrosse may be a redirect target. power~enwiki (π, ν) 21:37...
Click to read more »article only serves as a collection of TV ratings. WP:NOTSTATS and WP:RAWDATA apply here. Ajf773 (talk) 20:07, 29 July 2020 (UTC) Keep - Valid article...
Click to read more »(talk) 14:25, 27 November 2020 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTREPOSITORY and WP:RAWDATA, with no prejudice against creating an article on the digits of pi containing...
Click to read more »website. Trivial and non-notable. Fails WP:GNG. Also see WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:RAWDATA. Full of redlinks and some have broken templates. Created as part of a...
Click to read more »scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) WP:NOTDIR and WP:RAWDATA. This is a list of handicapping/normalization constants for yacht racing...
Click to read more »to support. Seems to me it fails WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, and WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 16:14, 1 October 2019 (UTC) Delete I have not found evidence...
Click to read more »although you can find sources for some (e.g. [1] and [2]) WP:IINFO/WP:RAWDATA - Wikipedia is not an exhaustive directory of every single act that has...
Click to read more »match scores (with a small intro at the top) which IMO falls under WP:RAWDATA. I stated that the cup was notable, but not necessarily each year's qualifying...
Click to read more »be quite difficult to support. Fails WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »Square Thing (talk) 17:48, 27 January 2021 (UTC) Delete per WP:NOTSTATS/WP:RAWDATA. "To provide encyclopedic value, data should be put in context with explanations...
Click to read more »whatsoever. Ajf773 (talk) 20:53, 11 December 2019 (UTC) Delete non-notable WP:RAWDATA; also applies to List of Farm Names in Østfold. The author has commented...
Click to read more »even part of the formal published (and peer reviewed) paper. This is WP:RAWDATA, an excessive listing of statistics drawn by OR from PRIMARY sources. Agricolae...
Click to read more »scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Comes under WP:RAWDATA as a table with no context. A summary of this could easily be included...
Click to read more »redirected. BOZ (talk) 03:19, 13 October 2019 (UTC) @Vulcan's Forge: See WP:RAWDATA for why that argument doesn't hold weight. Wikipedia cannot simply have...
Click to read more »list under WP:LISTPURP. Also goes against key principles of WP:IINFO (WP:RAWDATA). Also, inclusion criteria are unclear. Ed Sheeran might well be born in...
Click to read more »other. Just like every other highway interchange in the world. See WP:RAWDATA. Being able to find WP:RS is a necessary, but not sufficient, condition...
Click to read more »serves as only promotion. Fails at least WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 20:40, 19 August 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »where his fifers are discussed as a set or group, so fails WP:NLIST, WP:RAWDATA. Also, note that User talk:Vibhijain who created this list has been blocked...
Click to read more »this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC) Delete as WP:RAWDATA. I'm also unable to figure out exactly what source was used. There's an...
Click to read more »do think a valid nomination could be made for this page, perhaps as WP:RAWDATA, so maybe you could just elaborate and talk about the content specifically...
Click to read more »January 2014 (UTC) Delete per NinjaRobotPirate: it's a List made up of WP:RAWDATA that's trying to be an article about a "phenomenon". Per WP:LISTN, this...
Click to read more »been doing) 01:42, 6 January 2017 (UTC) Delete per WP:SPORTCRIT and WP:RAWDATA. Icebob99 (talk) 01:45, 6 January 2017 (UTC) Keep. Pro lacrosse may not...
Click to read more »coronavirus pandemic data/China medical cases by province, basically WP:RAWDATA. Reywas92Talk 05:17, 19 March 2020 (UTC) Comment This article has the daily...
Click to read more »how this happened but I'm supposing that the original prohibition of WP:RAWDATA has been nobbled by a psephology wonk. From a policy POV, I'll have to...
Click to read more »but the list itself feels like it's a problem for WP:NOTCATALOG and WP:RAWDATA. The main reference of the article is an archived forum post, which is...
Click to read more »scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Fails WP:GNG and WP:RAWDATA. There's nothing notable about an individual weather radar installation...
Click to read more »this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC) Delete as WP:RAWDATA. I'm also unable to figure out exactly what source was used. There's an...
Click to read more »(books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Per WP:RAWDATA. Content doesn't match source and is only relevant for one particular year...
Click to read more »incomplete and out of date. There are strong problems for WP:NOTCATALOG and WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 02:35, 9 November 2019 (UTC) I am also nominating the...
Click to read more »reasons as List of artists who have performed at the Colston Hall; WP:RAWDATA and WP:IINFO. Wikipedia is not a directory of every band or singer that...
Click to read more »this notice. Thanks, Sandstein 09:14, 28 March 2019 (UTC) Delete as WP:RAWDATA. I'm also unable to figure out exactly what source was used. There's an...
Click to read more »encyclopedia to catalog unimportant bits of data and tv show statistics. WP:RAWDATA and WP:IINFO here. Tarc (talk) 15:32, 20 March 2013 (UTC) Delete strange...
Click to read more »incorporated in the article). As it stands, this is just a bunch of WP:RAWDATA about fiction absent meaningful properly-sourced context/analysis, making...
Click to read more »create and maintain Smokefoot (talk) 01:02, 2 August 2018 (UTC) Delete - WP:RAWDATA or WP:NOTTEXTBOOK seem to apply. Also, I guess we've been having this discussion...
Click to read more »serves as only promotion. Fails at least WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 14:23, 20 August 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »be quite difficult to support. Fails WP:NOTPROMOTION, WP:NOTCATALOG, WP:RAWDATA. Mikeblas (talk) 14:41, 22 September 2019 (UTC) Note: This discussion has...
Click to read more »fork of the main article, leap year; the list itself is unnecessary WP:RAWDATA. Having explained that a leap year is any number divisible by 4, except...
Click to read more »WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) Wikipedia is not a repository for data as per WP:RAWDATA - not encyclopaedic content Cardiffbear88 (talk) 23:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)...
Click to read more »1 December 2017 (UTC) Delete not an encyclopedic topic, a bunch of WP:RAWDATA that is primary-sourced. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:11, 2 December 2017 (UTC)...
Click to read more »article. Nyttend (talk) 21:36, 21 December 2013 (UTC) Delete - fails WP:RAWDATA.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 01:09, 22 December 2013 (UTC) Delete...
Click to read more »is useful and has a variety of references. It also does not violate WP:RAWDATA because contains sufficient explanatory text, more text can easily be added...
Click to read more »lacking any context or assertion of notability. Fails WP:LISTN and WP:RAWDATA. - MrX 12:02, 5 June 2014 (UTC) Note: This debate has been included in...
Click to read more »(UTC) Comment In its current state, this is just a pure collection of WP:RAWDATA absent any meaningful context or analysis. That does not an article make...
Click to read more »fiction/popular culture is bad content—it's essentially a stamp collection (i.e. WP:RAWDATA). I think what makes an article on topic X in fiction good is analysis...
Click to read more »that policy as it is very specific to only these circumstances: data or RAWDATA (which this isn't), summary-only descriptions of works (which this also...
Click to read more »described at WP:NPOV, WP:VER and WP:WWIN (esp. sections at WP:NOTPROMO and WP:RAWDATA) – or you risk it will be reverted, as it happened to Republic of Gamers...
Click to read more »exemplify? Taking a look at a sample of the entries, I see a collection of WP:RAWDATA about fiction. TompaDompa (talk) 01:16, 15 December 2024 (UTC) At least...
Click to read more »That's not really a great reason to merge, but if you remove all the WP:RAWDATA and uncited stuff, the article is short enough to be merged per WP:SHORTTEXT...
Click to read more »subject, but the bulk of this article is basically just a bunch of WP:RAWDATA. TompaDompa (talk) 12:58, 1 February 2025 (UTC) Merge to The Adventures...
Click to read more »it is that the article consists of an indiscriminate collection of WP:RAWDATA (the 2008 essay WP:CARGO explains rather well how and why this is a problem...
Click to read more »Australia. Qwerty123M (talk) 11:48, 3 July 2026 (UTC) Merge – As per WP:RAWDATA, this doesn't need a standalone article. FaviFake (talk) 16:35, 3 July...
Click to read more »avoid hyperlink misuse. I think this approach is problematic from a WP:RAWDATA perspective, but it would eliminate most WP:OR issues (but not all; as...
Click to read more »that policy as it is very specific to only these circumstances: data or RAWDATA (which this isn't), summary-only descriptions of works (which this also...
Click to read more »online one would call it content farming. It is the assembly of pure WP:RAWDATA by way of WP:Original research at the whims of Wikipedia editors who have...
Click to read more »that policy as it is very specific to only these circumstances: data or RAWDATA (which this isn't), summary-only descriptions of works (which this also...
Click to read more »incorporated in the article). As it stands, this is just a bunch of WP:RAWDATA about fiction absent meaningful properly-sourced context/analysis, making...
Click to read more »that policy as it is very specific to only these circumstances: data or RAWDATA (which this isn't), summary-only descriptions of works (which this also...
Click to read more »(talk) 21:12, 22 July 2026 (UTC) Delete: per nomination, fails WP:GNG, WP:RAWDATA, and likely WP:NEXIST. Junosangleave a message 11:41, 23 July 2026 (UTC)...
Click to read more »scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL) This is just WP:RAWDATA formatted into a table... I don't think there's much more to say. I have...
Click to read more »online one would call it content farming. It is the assembly of pure WP:RAWDATA by way of WP:Original research at the whims of Wikipedia editors who have...
Click to read more »fiction/popular culture is bad content—it's essentially a stamp collection (i.e. WP:RAWDATA). I think what makes an article on topic X in fiction good is analysis...
Click to read more »(UTC) Comment In its current state, this is just a pure collection of WP:RAWDATA absent any meaningful context or analysis. That does not an article make...
Click to read more »better. Therefore, nominating for deletion due to WP:NOTDIRECTORY, WP:RAWDATA, WP:RS failures. RandomEditsForWhenIRemember (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2026...
Click to read more »was reliable, which the source appears not to be). May also violate WP:RAWDATA (Random thought: could the data be turned into a chart and used in another...
Click to read more »do so, in which case it is an arbitrary and WP:ORIGINAL slicing of WP:RAWDATA in violation of policy. Given that you say that you agree that we should...
Click to read more »