Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Queue: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→The Queue: Reply |
→The Queue: Closed as keep (XFDcloser) |
||
| (11 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown) | |||
Line 1:
<div class="boilerplate afd vfd xfd-closed archived" style="background-color: #F3F9FF; margin: 2em 0 0 0; padding: 0 10px 0 10px; border: 1px solid #AAAAAA;">
:''The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. <span style="color:red">'''Please do not modify it.'''</span> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''
<!--Template:Afd top
Note: If you are seeing this page as a result of an attempt to re-nominate an article for deletion, you must manually edit the AfD nomination links to create a new discussion page using the name format of [[Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/PAGENAME (2nd nomination)]]. When you create the new discussion page, please provide a link to this old discussion in your nomination. -->
The result was '''keep'''. The only consensus I can see over the voluminous comments provided is the desire to keep this article in some form. I suggest moving the discussion from AFD to the article talk page to explore the possibility of renaming the article or merging some of the content to other articles. <span style="font-family:Papyrus; color:#800080;">[[User:Liz|'''''L'''''iz]]</span> <sup style="font-family: Times New Roman; color: #006400;">[[Special:Contributions/Liz|'''''Read!''''']] [[User talk:Liz|'''''Talk!''''']]</sup> 23:21, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
===[[:The Queue]]===
{{not a vote}}
<noinclude>{{AFD help}}</noinclude>
Line 55 ⟶ 61:
*'''Strong Keep''' This event ''does not'' fail [[WP:NEVENT]] as it is certainly: "'''significant''' (a 5 mile long queue), '''interesting''' (it's a 5 mile long queue!), ''and'' '''unusual enough''' (it's a 5 mile long queue to see the coffin of a dead monarch, possibly the last monarch in human history who will ever receive this much attention) to deserve attention or to be recorded". It is likely [[WP:LASTING]] in its significance as I think most observers recognize the absurdity of a five mile long queue to see a dead monarch in modern times. [[User:Paradoxsociety|<span style="font-family:arial black; color:#001A99">Paradox</span>]][[User talk:Paradoxsociety|<span style="font-family:arial black; color:#006699">society</span>]] 22:38, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
* '''Merge''' for the many reasons stated above. It can easily be part of the main page, no need to have a separate one. [[User:Eccekevin|Eccekevin]] ([[User talk:Eccekevin|talk]]) 23:22, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
* <s>'''Wait''' until Monday as many have said, then '''merge''' if/when it becomes clear this is the right choice. The Queue is certainly interesting as of now, but it will likely not be as notable in a year. In addition, I find the cultural significance stated in the article to be jumping the gun a little; the Queue has only existed for three days. How can we possibly know if it's culturally significant? If it proves to be somewhat significant in the long term, it can be given its own section in [[Death_and_state_funeral_of_Elizabeth_II#Lying in state and the Queue]], as it is a part of a larger event rather than a standalone incident. The amount of notable details will likely fit there. However, it may prove worthy of its own article in the end; it's worth waiting as this is still an ongoing event.</s> [[User:The Council of Seraphim|<span style="color: mediumorchid">The Council of Seraphim</span>]] | [[User talk:The Council of Seraphim|<span style="color: darkcyan">speak before the Council</span>]] 00:01, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
:* It's been several days and it seems the article may be worth a '''keep'''. The article has been expanded with enough relevant, well-cited details to make it worth its own article. That said, as many have stated, it may be best moved to a title like [[The Queue (lying in state of Elizabeth II)]] or [[Queue to view the coffin of Elizabeth II]]; as many have argued, the current name is catchy but likely won't be as ubiquitous in a few decades. I find that as a cultural phenomenon related to a historical event, with enough notable and documented incidents and relevance, it's worthy of its own article. Now that the event has passed, it's easier to see that it will still be relevant after time has passed, as a queue of this magnitude for a British monarch will likely not occur again. --[[User:The Council of Seraphim|<span style="color: mediumorchid">The Council of Seraphim</span>]] | [[User talk:The Council of Seraphim|<span style="color: darkcyan">speak before the Council</span>]] 15:58, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
:* '''Keep''', once the lying in state has finished, '''Merge'''. [[User:EmilySarah99|EmilySarah99]] ([[User talk:EmilySarah99|talk]]) 01:25, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
* '''Keep''' Big coverage in the UK and international media.—[[User:Champeillant|Champeillant]] ([[User talk:Champeillant|talk]]) 01:32, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
Line 136 ⟶ 143:
**This'll be my only response in this thread (it's just too much, and headed in a pretty predictable direction).<br/>{{tq|for Wikipedia to dismiss the in-depth coverage offered in reliable sources}} - Nobody has done that. We need evidence of lasting significance to demonstrate notability (which we do not yet have), and we need a reason for this to be separate from the main article (notability is required but not alone sufficient for this). {{tq|This is a subjective judgement}} It is no more or less subjective/crystal bally as the prediction that coverage ''will'' continue. These arguments are effectively the contradictory advice given at [[WP:DELAY]] and [[WP:RAPID]] (i.e. wait to create an article, and wait to delete an article). When someone ignores the former advice, the best we can do is use our judgment/experience to evaluate whether it's exceedingly likely there will continue to be coverage of this subject. My reading is that we will not see sustained coverage of the queue as distinct from the rest of the funeral, etc. — <samp>[[User:Rhododendrites|<span style="font-size:90%;letter-spacing:1px;text-shadow:0px -1px 0px Indigo;">Rhododendrites</span>]] <sup style="font-size:80%;">[[User_talk:Rhododendrites|talk]]</sup></samp> \\ 14:21, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
*** Given that (a) there's a whole academic discipline (apparently called "crowd science") behind the [[Queueing theory]] that resulted in the design of The Queue, and this is one of the all time longest and most complex queue's to organise (see ''[https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cumbria-62930775 Queen Elizabeth II: The Queue and the Cumbria expert who helped plan it]'', BBC, and ''[https://www.wired.co.uk/article/queen-elizabeth-ii-queue How to Design the Perfect Queue, According to Crowd Science]'', Wired) and (b) academics have been gathering to study what's happened to this one (''[https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/scientists-gather-study-psychology-queue-queen-elizabeth-ii-lying-in-state-22320839s Scientists gather to study psychology of the queue]'', The Times), it seems clear that The Queue will have longevity in some areas of scholarship, however niche. [[User:DeCausa|DeCausa]] ([[User talk:DeCausa|talk]]) 14:39, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
****In the context of that discipline, and if we have an article on crowd science and a section on queuing I would expect to see this (along with other large queues) being mentioned within the context of those pages, not forked. [[User:Koncorde|Koncorde]] ([[User talk:Koncorde|talk]]) 09:26, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. This page is too long for a merge into the main funeral article, which is already long, and The coverage of The Queue shows it will likely have a place in the British public consciousness like [[Clap for Our Carers]] does. It's also possibly the holder of a world record, although that hasn't been confirmed yet. | 🔬🚆 | <span style="font-size:100%;background:lightgreen;border:solid 0px;border-radius:3px;box-shadow:darkgray 0px 2px 2px;"> [[User:ADTelo|<b>Telo</b>]] |[[User talk:ADTelo| TP ]] </span> | 15:08, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
*'''Merge''' as above. The death of Elizabeth II has received saturation-level coverage in British media and it would be possible to write articles about even minor aspects of it as they pass the GNG. However as an encyclopedia we aren't supposed to do that. Instead we summarise the important information and leave out the more minor details. I'm not convinced that this aspect of the death will be significant, say, 10 years from now, and per [[WP:NOTNEWS]] and [[WP:LASTING]] we are only supposed to have articles on events with long-term significance. Yes, the article is too long to be merged into the funeral one, but that's the point - this level of coverage is too detailed. '''''[[User:Hut 8.5|<span style="color:#b50000;">Hut 8.5</span>]]''''' 16:42, 19 September 2022 (UTC)
Line 171 ⟶ 179:
*'''Merge''' per the reasons above. <span style="font-family: Verdana;">[[User:ed_g2s|ed g2s]] • [[User talk:ed_g2s|talk]]</span> 20:00, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' I respectfully disagree with the nominators assessment and <em>do</em> believe this meets the criteria for [[WP:NEVENT]]. It has received widespread media coverage both within the UK and abroad and I do believe it will stand the test of time as a memorable event. There seems sufficiently sourced and encyclopedic content here and as per [[User:Nosebagbear|Nosebagbear]] above that would seem too much for inclusion in the existing [[Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II]] article and hence this seems a reasonable spin-off. I wouldn't necessarily be against a rename, though, or perhaps a slight broadening in scope to cover the lying in state of Elizabeth II more broadly. <sub>└</sub><sup>'''[[User:UkPaolo| UkPaolo]]'''</sup>/<sub>''[[User Talk:UkPaolo|talk]]''</sub><sup>┐</sup> 21:03, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
*'''Rename'''. ''The Queue'' is catchy but hardly encyclopedic. Wikipedia has many articles less news worthy. The article is too big to merge. [[User:User-duck|User-duck]] ([[User talk:User-duck|talk]]) 21:21, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
*'''Keep'''. None of the alternatives look good at the moment. I think there's no reasonable doubt that the topic is notable; the question is just which page it belongs on. In principle, merging with [[Death and state funeral of Elizabeth II]] would make sense, but that article is already a bit too long. The proposals for renaming to "Lying in state of Elizabeth II" seem to be describing a different article from [[The Queue]]: currently the article is focussed on the unusual phenomenon of such a large number of people forming a queue, and how the queue is organised. There's room for questioning whether [[The Queue]] will attract the persistent and in-depth coverage recommended by [[WP:NEVENT]], but it's too early to assess that. If there's still doubt regarding notability a month from now, someone can renominate the page for deletion or other treatment. [[User:Jowa fan|Jowa fan]] ([[User talk:Jowa fan|talk]]) 22:57, 20 September 2022 (UTC)
:It isn't particularly long at all? [[User:Koncorde|Koncorde]] ([[User talk:Koncorde|talk]]) 09:26, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
*<small class="delsort-notice">Note: This discussion has been included in the [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Royalty and nobility|list of Royalty and nobility-related deletion discussions]]. [[User:Necrothesp|Necrothesp]] ([[User talk:Necrothesp|talk]]) 10:13, 21 September 2022 (UTC)</small>
*'''Keep''' There is clearly enough coverage now to demonstrate its lasting significance, and it is too long to merge into other articles which themselves are already on the long side. [[User:Edwardx|Edwardx]] ([[User talk:Edwardx|talk]]) 12:48, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' Per all the above points made excellently by other editors and close as [[WP:SNOW]] [[User:IntUnderflow|IntUnderflow]] ([[User talk:IntUnderflow|talk]]) 00:41, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
*'''Keep''' The actual numbers over the four days were not much more than for previous lying in state queues, but none of them had such heavy security restrictions to slow the progression, and none lasted close to the nearly five continuous days, night and day, for this queue. It was a unique phenomenon, I don't see it happening again for any well-known person's death. --[[User:Iceblink|Iceblink]] ([[User talk:Iceblink|talk]]) 04:10, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
{{clear}}
:''The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. <b style="color:red">Please do not modify it.</b> Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's [[Help:Using talk pages|talk page]] or in a [[Wikipedia:Deletion review|deletion review]]). No further edits should be made to this page.''<!--Template:Afd bottom--></div>
| |||