Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Lewis Hamilton

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 delete‎ all. Owen× ☎ 21:11, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Lewis Hamilton[edit]

[Hide this box] New to Articles for deletion (AfD)? Read these primers!

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

Reasoning: Other AfDs including for the multi-list AfD against Damon Hill Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Damon Hill have established the precedent that these lists are both WP:CRUFT and fail WP:LISTN as being needless forks of existing lists, they also have no notable group or set presence within discussions as shown by a lack of these such sources in the articles. Discussion also on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Max Verstappen centres on the WP:NOTSTATS argument. Consensus exists that such lists are not notable, and on the argument for the Verstappen AfD is clearly made that such lists regardless of win number are not considered notable. This deletion request is to reflect the latest consensus. The same discussion has also been ongoing on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Formula One and Talk:Max Verstappen

When creating this deletion request, articles

Should also be included for the same reasons. It is the second AfD request for the Senna article, the original is here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Ayrton Senna. I would appreciate if someone could create this AfD as it is important for the motorsport category and part of wider ongoing discussions (please if I am unable to can this be added to the motorsport project AfD)

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Motorsport-related deletion discussions. 159.242.125.170 (talk) 15:38, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination by IP: 159.242.125.170 (talk)

I vote delete per the discussions at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Damon Hill and Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Formula One Grand Prix wins by Max Verstappen — Iadmc ♫^talk 15:08, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Sportspeople, Motorsport, and Lists. — Iadmc ♫^talk 15:44, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I have fixed this nomination to actually use {{subst:afd2}}, rather than just {{la}} on its own. No opinion or further comment at this time. WCQuidditch ☎ ✎ 19:52, 12 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all bases on the current consensus on this subject which follows WP:CFORK and WP:LISTN.T v x1 01:18, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The main difference between these drivers and the other subjects which were deleted is that these are all three-or-more-time World Champions who should be expected to have more wins and coverage than the others. I would personally reject WP:OTHERSTUFF arguments such as those raised by the nom and above delete !voters that these drivers fall under a consensus based on the others. If these are kept, I would also support looking at taking the Verstappen list to DRV for recreation. The main difference between now the the Verstappen AfD is that he too is now a three-time World Champion. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 03:01, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Also, @159.242.125.170:, you need to tag all of the articles you wish to bundle, not just notify on the talk pages. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 04:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will try, very hard to do multi-page AfDs properly as an unregistered user my apologies!

I agree that Verstappen is more notable than at the time of his AfD, but the fundamental issue is that we have no way of currently defining notability. If this AfD fails, hopefully it can set that precedent, if it doesn't then we know the issue is with the format not having proven notability.

You cite these are WP:OTHERSTUFF arguments, but I counter that I do not point to them being deleted and say that because they were deleted these should be - instead I am pointing to the logic behind them and the comments on the AfDs where many explicitly called for an AfD against these lists also. The arguments against all of these lists were made in those AfDs, hence why I have referenced them. I do believe there should be some level of consistency in how these lists exist, and if this AfD fails I will propose the creation of any articles which would logically follow (if it is three time champions, I will try and create lists for them, if it is drivers who have X number of wins, same again) but I'm not sure that these pass WP:CRUFT , WP:LISTN and WP:NOTSTATS.

The size of the grouping doesn't mean it necessitates a list - Wikipedia doesn't need a list of the list of winners of your local egg and spoon race no matter how good Mr Eggman is as the 12 time champion. Unless we can show that these articles pass WP:LISTN - "Editors are still urged to demonstrate list notability via the grouping itself before creating stand-alone lists."

If we could get 3 sources for each driver where a reliable third party, such as a newspaper of record or the like, was discussing their wins (be it listing the drivers' dominance across those, or be it ranking some of their wins perhaps?) than I would be willing to concede WP:LISTN .

Also I wish to note, Draft:List_of_Formula_One_Grand_Prix_wins_by_Max_Verstappen was denied just 2 weeks before his 3rd title, so I'm not sure that has had an impact on my claimed consensus so far.

I also remind the guidelines on WP:OTHERSTUFF do state:

"If you reference such a past debate, and it is clearly a very similar case to the current debate, this can be a strong argument that should not be discounted because of a misconception that this section is a blanket ban on ever referencing other articles or deletion debates." 159.242.125.170 (talk) 08:25, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, firstly, I am disappointed that the nominator did not follow recommend courtesy, and notify substantial contributors to these articles, as suggested (but not required) in the AfD process. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 11:44, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Apologies for causing your disappointment, but sadly I am not very well accustomed with the process and tried to reach out to people who had been involved in such suggestions in previous AfDs. I hope personal disappointment will not factor into this however. 159.242.125.170 (talk) 11:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
(also, Wikipedia:Please bite the newbies I hope I am tasty ) 159.242.125.170 (talk) 12:59, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep the wins by these drivers are extremely notable. Using Senna as an example: whenever another driver approaches and passes his total it is reported as a significant achievement in the press Formula1.com, Sky Sports for example. While these win are listed in the parent articles, that is only as part of their complete Formula 1 racing results, and does not give the level of detail of these articles. These lists allow interested readers to compare and contrast those victories. The lists meet the criteria for a Stand-alone list, given the length of the parent articles. The articles follows a similar style and structure to standalone lists such as List of international goals scored by Wayne Rooney, List of international cricket centuries by Sachin Tendulkar and List of international rugby union tries by Jonah Lomu. I'm well aware that WP:OTHERSTUFF is an argument to be avoided, but the presence of these articles demonstrates that lists such as these are common across the encyclopedia, and form part of the current 'meta'. With regards to the WP:NOTSTATS argument; that says that the encyclopedia should not have "excessive listings of unexplained statistics": indeed, I would suggest that by having these as standalone lists means that we are better able to provide the suitable context to avoid them being "unexplained statistics": many of the tables in the "Racing records" sections of drivers articles are more in contravention of that particular guideline than these articles, in my opinion. Harrias ^{(he/him) • talk} 11:44, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can see your argument for keeping Senna, but few other drivers are used in such a way. As I discussed earlier in this thread, if we can find sources for these lists to be notable as a set as you have done for Senna then that may warrant their inclusion on WP:LISTN - and I would agree that the racing record section can be overwhelming but without much intention to suggest they should be removed.

As for the WP:OTHERSTUFF argument, I'm not sure how useful it is because for example Rooney has many independent sources referencing the goals as a set. I can't say I've seen the same for Prost, maybe not even for any driver outside of Senna. Other than the fact it is a very long list, the group of Hamilton's impressive tally is rarely talked about at which point I would compare it to creating an article of "Letters in antidisestablishmentarianism" which is impressive because the list is so long, but aside from that, is not notable. This is an extreme but still, just because other WikiProjects have done something doesn't mean Formula One should for example. It also raises the question as to what the notability criteria should be, if we are to keep these: what level of notability makes Prost worth keeping? 159.242.125.170 (talk) 12:07, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

These lists might allow readers to compare and contrast their victories, but not in any meaningful way. The lack any of the context required to be able to take any meaningful insight (which is why WP:NOSTAT is mentioned). The margin and grid position columns are the NOSTAT violations. The rest of the columns also exist in their racing record summary. And it may vollow the style and structure for the article you listed for Rooney, Tendulkar or Lomu but the major difference is that these wins can be viewed in the articles for the respective drivers (as you acknowledge in the third sentence of your response, the same can not be said for Rooney, Tendulkar or Lomu. SSSB (talk) 22:41, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom, ladmc and Tvx1. These all are best integrated in main articles. SpacedFarmer (talk) 12:17, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete per nom - just repeating data already presented at the home article of the driver in the career results sections. --Falcadore (talk) 15:49, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep all - they are all valid WP:SIZESPLITs of their respective articles, keeping said articles from being too hard to navigate and read. Merging all should also be considered by delete !voters, especially since SpacedFarmer's rationale is basically a merge !vote, not a delete !vote. But again, we're risking making these articles too long and clunky (per WP:NOMERGE). The LISTCRUFT essay does not apply here when these are split from their respective articles, not standalone. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 16:31, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These are not valid sizesplits, because they were not split. You are the only person who has suggested that we should be merging, mainly because those arguning for deletion (as far as I can tell by skimming the arguemnts) feel that the level of detail these articles go into (i.e. with grid positions and margin of victory) are in violation of WP:FANCRUFT and WP:NOSTATS regardless of whether they are in their own article, or in the general article about that driver. The listcruft essay does apply because this was split from the respective articles. SSSB (talk) 22:45, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note: This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: France, Germany, England, and Brazil. ― "Ghost of Dan Gurney" (talk) 18:00, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep All of them are the same as the many other such articles for sports people. Category:Career achievements of sportspeople If it won't fit in their main article, then a split off article is justified. We do the same when listing the accomplishments of actors and musicians, if their awards don't all fit in their main article, you make a side article to list them. Dream Focus 22:42, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The difference is that the accomplishment of thier race wins does fit in the main article, it is bundlged together with a breakdown of their results. The only unique information of the nominated pages is FANCRUFT and NOSTAT violations with a summary of their results (and by extention wins) accessible in the main articles. SSSB (talk) 22:48, 15 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete: These are all redundant forks of information already found at the main articles for these subjects. Let'srun (talk) 17:09, 14 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delete all the articles of the respective drivers already break-down their races wins in a much cleaner and succinct way - through the race record table (e.g. Lewis Hamilton#Complete Formula One results). The nominated articles do nothing other than specify minor details. The only parts of these articles which are unique to these articles (i.e. not already specified on the main driver page) are: date, circuit, grid position and margin which are all either WP:FANCRUFT, WP:NOSTAT or both (e.g. margin and grid position lack any of the context required for this information to be worth anything meaningful. These articles serve no purpose other than to offer irrelevant and/or contextless data. SSSB (talk) 22:36, 15 June 2024 (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.