Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Predecessors of sovereign states in Europe

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 keep. There is clearly an issue with this group of articles that needs to be resolved but it does not appear that deletion is the preferred method of doing this. Black Kite (t) (c) 20:33, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Predecessors of sovereign states in Europe

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

It is unclear what this article is about. It does not list all the predecessors of sovereign states in Europe. It does not list only the immediate predecessor. It doesn't do so because it is impossible to define clearly what is and is not a predecessor and when many states attained sovereignty. Is East Germany a predecessor of todays Federal Republic of Germany? Is the Fourth Republic a predecessor of France's Fifth? Aren't they the same France? Are the individual SSRs the predecessors or is it the USSR? Why should we even be trying to answer questions like this for the sake of a list that we cooked up and that cannot be found in the best reliable sources? Srnec (talk) 18:46, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Europe-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:21, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep and modify according to this proposal. Alinor (talk) 09:58, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep – the article states quite clearly at the top that it is incomplete. Completion, not deletion, should be the response by a Wikipedian to an incomplete article. The article is very new and so the definition of a predecessor may not be completely clear but this can be resolved. I created the article to avoid cluttering up List of sovereign states in Europe by date of achieving sovereignty, which I notice has also been nominated for deletion. The articles can definitely be improved and should definitely not be deleted. Why is it that some people seem to only like summaries rather than large collections of information? McLerristarr / Mclay1 03:08, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- No, it can't be resolved. That is why I am aiming for deletion. As one editor noted elsewhere about these lists, they are based on no "coherent set of criteria". The definition of a predecessor is not clear because it must arbitrarily restricted to make a meaningful list. The restrictions can be nothing but arbitrary. What is the predecessor of Germany today? It has many predecessors, all bearing different relationships to the present Germany. Which one(s) do we pick? It is arbitrary. Or we list them all, then the list is unwieldly and amounts to a List of every state or administrative unit in Europe that no longer exists. I would love a large collection of information based on a coherent criteria of inclusion/exclusion, not some arbitrary whim. Further, I don't see why ever potential piece of information must be listified. This just doesn't work. What is the predecessor of Andorra? It is better to write history, not list it. Let the articles on the histories of the present sovereign states explain how they got to be what they are and what came before them in their territories. Srnec (talk) 03:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Delete I agree that the definition of predecessor cannot reasonably be resolved. The individual issues should be and are addressed in the individual articles for the states. A list is a very poor way to present this information. Dingo1729 (talk) 16:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, /ƒETCH COMMS / 00:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – This article is basically a list form of Timeline of sovereign states in Europe. It looks better as a list. McLerristarr / Mclay1 05:24, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- I'd just as soon see that one deleted too. Srnec (talk) 04:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there is a AfD discussion about List of sovereign states in Europe by date of achieving sovereignty ongoing. That's why I tried to compile a list of the articles of this type (there are more than those discussed here): here. Consider the proposal there for arranging all such articles in a coherent way. Alinor (talk) 10:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: It is ridiculous to delete an article, because it has to be edited in some places. -- Tomdo08 (talk) 21:21, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- It is ridiculous to imply that that's the rationale for this deletion request. As an other editor put it: "the definition of predecessor cannot reasonably be resolved". Srnec (talk) 04:04, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment To expand on that, when does a state become a "new" state and so can have predecessors instead of just the same state which has changed somewhat? When it changes its name? When it has a revolution? When it acquires or loses territory? When it ""achieves sovereignty""? When it is liberated? The list is an inconsistent mish-mash of all these with some instances of each included and other similar instances ignored. No reputable historian or lawyer would ever want to try to codify this. So to create such a list we have to invent our own definition and then twist and distort history to fit our arbitrary definition. This cannot be anything but Original Research. What are predecessors? States, some of whose territories are incorporated into the "new" state? States which contributed ""a lot"" of territory? Whatever an editor chooses today? The assumptions underlying this list distort history Dingo1729 (talk) 05:07, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  - Dingo gets it exactly right. Srnec (talk) 03:17, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep: Notable and useful. The fact that it may be hard to iron out the details is not a justification for deletion.--Carwil (talk) 02:41, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually it is. The reason is that the information presented is misleading. The article is not only completely useless, but downright damaging (distorting). It suggests that the notions of "predecessor [state]" and "sovereign state" are clear-cut when they are anything but. This information simply cannot be listified per WP:V and WP:RS to avoid WP:OR, WP:SYN and WP:NPOV. I would also say that when an article is about "Predecessors of sovereign states in Europe", the question of what counts as a predecessor and what counts as a sovereign state are not "details". Srnec (talk) 03:17, 12 October 2010 (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.