Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Canoeing and kayaking

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 redirect to Outline of canoeing and kayaking. As the discussion has progressed a clear consensus for redirecting to this outline article has developed, which dodges most of the issues raised in the earlier arguments between keep and delete. ~ mazca ^talk 15:56, 8 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Canoeing and kayaking (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Unnecessary disambiguation page; disambiguates solely to the two water sports named in the title. Has more than one disambiguation, and so doesn't appear to qualify for Speedy Delete G14? BilledMammal (talk) 03:22, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Speedy delete Huh? Like what? Why? Reywas92^Talk 03:54, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete per WP:ONLYONEOARINTHEWATER. List of water sports is quite sufficient. Clarityfiend (talk) 05:08, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Redirect to either List of surface water sports#Rowing or Outline of canoeing and kayaking. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:23, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. Completely useless disambiguation. Change vote to Redirect to Outline of canoeing and kayaking as there is now an obvious redirect target. Ajf773 (talk) 08:40, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete as pointless, this isn't what we mean by ambiguity. Chiswick Chap (talk) 10:29, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Disambiguations-related deletion discussions. Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:31, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete - serves no purpose Spiderone^{(Talk to Spider)} 10:32, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Best Alexandermcnabb (talk) 14:24, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete Absolutely not what a DAB page does. It's already snowing. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:44, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Sports-related deletion discussions. –LaundryPizza03 (dc̄) 15:46, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Comment The page was created as a redirect (to Canoeing) from a term used in Wikidata - see this version, albeit by an editor who has been blocked and locked. PamD 08:40, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looking at that editor's contributions around that time, they made a large number of similar redirects from Wikidata terms, most of which have not been deleted and are therefore probably considered a Good Thing. So I've reverted this article back to its redirect status. It's useful to check the history of a page before AfDing it. PamD 08:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Note: my reverting to redirect has been reverted. PamD 09:02, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as redirect, as it was until 17 May. PamD 08:45, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • That's not a very good redirect target to use as it only covers half the topic. Ajf773 (talk) 08:57, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well the lead of that article does say "In some parts of Europe canoeing refers to both canoeing and kayaking," so I think it's better than nothing. PamD 09:00, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
      • Note that Canoeing and kayaking at the Summer Olympics redirects to Canoeing at the Summer Olympics, for one example. While we have a redirect from the Wikidata term, there is somewhere for other language Wikipedias to link to for readers who want to see an English-language article. If we lose this redirect, there wouldn't be. See German and French articles. PamD 11:06, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
        • I have found two better redirect targets. Clarityfiend (talk) 23:26, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Note I've mentioned this discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Redirect and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikidata, to try to find an expert on Wikidata Redirects. PamD 11:27, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep I came here following a notice at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikidata and agree that this is a case where other language Wikipedia articles should guide this decision. The combination of these two sports seems to pass WP:GNG as non-English languages seem to treat these two as one concept. See this treatment at fr:Canoë-kayak, de:Kanusport, it:Canoa/kayak, and others at d:Q213934#sitelinks-wikipedia. English Wikipedia does not currently have clear policy for reconciling with other language Wikipedias and Wikidata, but we do have the WP:GNG which establishes that a concept is notable if we have multiple reliable sources presenting it as a subject. Since this concept passes GNG then it is good enough at least for a redirect page if not a disambiguation page. Blue Rasberry (talk) 14:33, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Bluerasberry: Is that "Keep as redirect" or "Keep as set index"? PamD 15:19, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  @PamD: I prefer as a set index but am unsure. We have two distinct concepts but also a strong precedent of grouping them. This seems like the unresolved Wikidata "Bonnie and Clyde" problem documented at d:Help:Handling sitelinks overlapping multiple items and meta:Community Wishlist Survey 2019/Wikidata/Solution to the ‟Bonnie and Clyde” problem. I do not think we have a general solution to this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:56, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Why would you consider this a candidate for set indexing? WP:SETINDEX restricts it to "items of a specific type that also share the same (or similar) name", not related names. Clarityfiend (talk) 19:53, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep in some form. I think what might be ideal would be to have a short page that explains that canoeing and kayaking are water sports that are variously regarded as either variants of a single disciplines or as separate disciplines depending on language and context. I haven't looked but it seems likely that they share some common history, and if that is the case then a mention of that would also be appropriate. I don't know whether I'd call it a broad concept dab, an article or a set index but that's utterly trivial. As a second choice a straight disambig or redirect to a relevant list would be fine too. Ultimately though we should not be deleting pages that are clearly useful to readers just because we can't neatly pigeonhole them. Thryduulf (talk) 20:06, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Outline of canoeing and kayaking has that, and this could redirect there but should not exist as anything else. Reywas92^Talk 01:13, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  Outline of canoeing and kayaking does look like a good target in this instance, but why should we not have anything else? Thryduulf (talk) 15:44, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I do not see what would be said that is not already at Canoeing or Kayaking or the outline, or could be added to it. That would be a disservice to readers to spread content onto a fourth article on the same topic that is not linked to from any article, nor should be. Reywas92^Talk 06:02, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect to Outline of canoeing and kayaking where this is covered in detail. -- Tavix ^(talk) 15:53, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Automated comment: This AfD was not correctly transcluded to the log (step 3). I have transcluded it to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2021 May 29. —^{cyberbot I}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 14:47, 29 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete. If this were a redirect I'd recommend deletion: a classic WP:XY. Both articles refer to the other in their leads. Shhhnotsoloud (talk) 12:09, 30 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  I would strongly argue against WP:XY being relevant as there are multiple sources that consider these two topics as a single unit and we have an article that covers both topics in addition to the Wikidata and multiple foreign language Wikipedias meaning that people will be looking for something at this title. We must consider our reads first and foremost and inconveniencing them (which deletion will do) simply because we can't fit this neatly into a single one of our arbitrary boxes is the exact opposite of putting the reader first. Thryduulf (talk) 12:22, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

• Redirect per Tavix to Outline of canoeing and kayaking. Not a proper dab page and the outline appears to serve well as a leader into the similar-but-different water sports articles. P.I. Ellsworth  ed. ^put'r there 22:42, 31 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Outline of canoeing and kayaking, which seems the best candidate. Editors who have said the 17 May revision is not a proper disambiguation page are not wrong, but the redirect to Canoeing was a valid redirect even if target was sub-optimal. Redirects are cheap. Politrukki (talk) 15:08, 6 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]
• Redirect to Outline of canoeing and kayaking for the reasons stated above. Definitely don't need a standalone page for this. DocFreeman24 (talk) 02:58, 8 June 2021 (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.