Knowledge

:Articles for deletion/List of people on the postage stamps of China - Knowledge

Source 📝

475:, "The MediaWiki software does not allow page history to be publicly archived at a page title that does not host a live page or redirect. Therefore, if two pages with parallel histories are merged but it is undesirable to keep a redirect from the deprecated page title to the destination page title, the old page history needs to move. This is sometimes done by moving the page history to a subpage of the talk page of the destination page. An example can be found at 291:; and yet we have stuff from 2010 and 2013..).; because many of the entries are not even Chinese people (showing how this is an arbitrary listing by a trivial characteristic of otherwise entirely unrelated people); and because, of course, it does not cite a single source, which for what one would think are stamps from a fair bit ago, makes even the usual claims from 384:, just like most of these other lists, it's unsourced, horribly incomplete, has arbitrary inclusion criteria, and even if the names can be verified in a catalog, there's zero proof that the underlying topic is one worth making a list out of. All of these stamp AFDs, even the ones closed as "keep", have failed to prove 255:(as evidenced by the fact people keep citing the existence of these lists as a reason to keep having them even when they fail inclusion criteria), as Knowledge is not a philatelical catalogue and there is no indication how this kind of page is of any broader encyclopedic significance. An encyclopedia is 364:
in Knowledge. Also considering "pre-division" Taiwan was under Japanese rule for most of the first half of the 20th-century, even calling the splitting off of Taiwan "division" seems to be the wrong wording. Plus the list does not comply with its own parameters, and there are no sources. It has
535:
and adding a "History" section, I find the content of this article to be valuable even if it is unsourced. The list can be used to find sources about the dynasties period aspect of the topic which can aid a selective merge to the article that currently discusses only the current
546:
and sourcing entries on the list, which had previously been completely unsourced. I would not have been able to expand the Hong Kong article that well without the help of the unsourced entries in the list, which substantially aided me in searching for more sources about the
411:
Ignoring the NLIST concern here, it makes no sense to partition it to the dynasties period and the current period. I would of said to merge them first but the list is unsourced. Perhaps that article would also fail NLIST but that is the subject for another AfD.
763:), would you support preserving the history as I suggested above and converting this article into a redirect to the other article? It is useful to retain the history to assist in finding sources and merging material from this article into the other article. 208: 481:
Although this is not a parallel versions case, the guide says that "moving the page history to a subpage of the talk page of the destination page" is an option. I would support either this or moving to draft followed by a redirect to
746: 722: 532: 515: 483: 406: 52:. While this topic is potentially of interest and notable, the article as it is does not establish notability. There is no prejudice against recreating this list with proper sources in the future if there is interest. 138: 133: 142: 202: 125: 472: 321: 129: 587: 543: 165: 599: 569: 742: 519: 511: 121: 73: 325: 223: 112: 190: 97: 786: 777:
As a completely unreferenced list, I am not seeing a benefit in preserving article history. I think you are overstating the usefulness of this list.
772: 734: 709: 688: 671: 654: 636: 615: 581: 558: 495: 466: 452: 421: 399: 374: 355: 337: 308: 280: 251:(as generally "Simple listings without contextual information showing encyclopedic merit."); and furthermore, because having this is definitively a 67: 317: 184: 476: 304: 276: 346:
It is an unsouced list. We have no evidence it actually meets the criteria for a list. Plus no one seems to really know what scope it has.
180: 230: 92: 85: 17: 440: 196: 760: 667: 169: 106: 102: 749:
discusses people on postage stamps from 1949–present. I agree that there is no need to have two separate articles.
807: 577: 524: 370: 351: 40: 300: 272: 256: 697: 287:
On top of that, this list really takes the cake because it is inconsistent with its own inclusion criteria (
663: 248: 247:, as already stated: not in this AfD, and not in the article. Otherwise, this and all similar pages fail 803: 260: 60: 36: 649: 603: 573: 366: 347: 333: 296: 289:
This page lists only those people who appeared on Chinese stamps before the division of the country
268: 216: 764: 607: 550: 487: 462: 444: 434: 417: 292: 264: 782: 754: 730: 705: 252: 81: 29:
The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below.
802:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
365:
existed since 2006. Unsourced articles should not last over 15 days, let alone over 15 years.
35:
Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's
768: 684: 611: 554: 491: 448: 360:
It says it is only for pre-division, but that would be inconsistent with every other use of
54: 645: 595: 244: 718: 632: 443:), would you support my proposal below to retain the article history under a redirect? 329: 458: 430: 413: 389: 594:
now has a 652-word history as well as every entry on the list sourced), it would be
568:
I still do not see how any of this justifies a complete list or a content fork from
778: 750: 726: 721:. While a list of this type could be sourced, it is an unnecessary content fork of 701: 159: 680: 628: 473:
Knowledge:Administrators' guide/Fixing cut-and-paste moves#Parallel versions
486:
so that the useful history is preserved to assist in searches for sources.
747:
List of people on the postage stamps of the People's Republic of China
723:
List of people on the postage stamps of the People's Republic of China
533:
List of people on the postage stamps of the People's Republic of China
516:
List of people on the postage stamps of the People's Republic of China
484:
List of people on the postage stamps of the People's Republic of China
407:
List of people on the postage stamps of the People's Republic of China
295:
that the contents list can be "easily verified" entirely implausible.
265:
interesting to a limited number of dedicated philatelical enthusiasts
361: 471:
Thank you for supporting the retention of the page history. From
798:
The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate.
627:
there should be a general discussion about these stamp lists --
602:. A complete list is justified because the subject passes 745:
discusses people on postage stamps from 1878–1949, while
591: 539: 528: 155: 151: 147: 477:
Talk:Compilation of Final Fantasy VII#Old page history
215: 525:Knowledge:Deletion policy#Alternatives to deletion 588:list of people on the postage stamps of Hong Kong 544:List of people on the postage stamps of Hong Kong 457:I am fine with a drafticiation or userification. 43:). No further edits should be made to this page. 810:). No further edits should be made to this page. 388:the lists are "useful" or "notable" or whatever 316:Note: This discussion has been included in the 257:not an indiscriminate collection of information 600:postage stamps and postal history of Hong Kong 570:postage stamps and postal history of Hong Kong 243:No evidence whatsoever exists that this meets 743:List of people on the postage stamps of China 520:List of people on the postage stamps of China 512:List of people on the postage stamps of China 229: 122:List of people on the postage stamps of China 74:List of people on the postage stamps of China 8: 644:Lacks independent sources establishing that 113:Help, my article got nominated for deletion! 542:on adding a 511-word "History" section to 315: 604:Knowledge:Notability#Stand-alone lists 288: 7: 514:to another title and redirect it to 24: 392:wants to be thrown around today. 679:due to lack of proper sourcing. 320:lists for the following topics: 263:, and despite it possibly being 98:Introduction to deletion process 18:Knowledge:Articles for deletion 405:Delete this article then move 1: 518:after the latter is moved to 510:Move the article history of 88:(AfD)? Read these primers! 827: 787:12:34, 15 June 2022 (UTC) 773:10:48, 15 June 2022 (UTC) 735:05:04, 15 June 2022 (UTC) 710:00:03, 15 June 2022 (UTC) 689:14:28, 14 June 2022 (UTC) 672:22:32, 12 June 2022 (UTC) 655:06:49, 12 June 2022 (UTC) 68:21:28, 15 June 2022 (UTC) 800:Please do not modify it. 637:22:08, 9 June 2022 (UTC) 616:10:22, 6 June 2022 (UTC) 582:04:07, 5 June 2022 (UTC) 559:12:24, 4 June 2022 (UTC) 496:00:38, 5 June 2022 (UTC) 467:22:34, 4 June 2022 (UTC) 453:12:24, 4 June 2022 (UTC) 422:06:42, 4 June 2022 (UTC) 400:18:17, 3 June 2022 (UTC) 375:16:46, 3 June 2022 (UTC) 356:16:44, 3 June 2022 (UTC) 338:15:58, 3 June 2022 (UTC) 309:15:57, 3 June 2022 (UTC) 281:15:49, 3 June 2022 (UTC) 32:Please do not modify it. 700:, no reliable sources. 598:to include the list in 170:edits since nomination 86:Articles for deletion 527:. As an editor who 664:Bookworm857158367 574:John Pack Lambert 465: 420: 367:John Pack Lambert 348:John Pack Lambert 340: 103:Guide to deletion 93:How to contribute 818: 698:WP:Verifiability 461: 416: 397: 395:Ten Pound Hammer 318:deletion sorting 234: 233: 219: 163: 145: 83: 63: 57: 34: 826: 825: 821: 820: 819: 817: 816: 815: 814: 808:deletion review 651:MrsSnoozyTurtle 393: 322:Lists of people 249:WP:NOTDIRECTORY 176: 136: 120: 117: 80: 77: 61: 55: 48:The result was 41:deletion review 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 824: 822: 813: 812: 794: 793: 792: 791: 790: 789: 712: 691: 674: 657: 639: 622: 621: 620: 619: 618: 563: 562: 506: 505: 504: 503: 502: 501: 500: 499: 425: 424: 402: 379: 378: 377: 341: 312: 311: 297:RandomCanadian 293:PhilatelyCRUFT 284: 283: 269:RandomCanadian 237: 236: 173: 116: 115: 110: 100: 95: 78: 76: 71: 46: 45: 25: 23: 15: 14: 13: 10: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 823: 811: 809: 805: 801: 796: 795: 788: 784: 780: 776: 775: 774: 770: 766: 762: 759: 756: 752: 748: 744: 741: 738: 737: 736: 732: 728: 724: 720: 716: 713: 711: 707: 703: 699: 695: 692: 690: 686: 682: 678: 675: 673: 669: 665: 661: 658: 656: 653: 652: 647: 643: 640: 638: 634: 630: 626: 623: 617: 613: 609: 605: 601: 597: 593: 590:(which after 589: 585: 584: 583: 579: 575: 571: 567: 566: 565: 564: 561: 560: 556: 552: 548: 545: 541: 534: 530: 526: 522: 521: 517: 513: 508: 507: 498: 497: 493: 489: 485: 478: 474: 470: 469: 468: 464: 460: 456: 455: 454: 450: 446: 442: 439: 436: 432: 429: 428: 427: 426: 423: 419: 415: 410: 409:to this title 408: 403: 401: 396: 391: 387: 383: 380: 376: 372: 368: 363: 359: 358: 357: 353: 349: 345: 342: 339: 335: 331: 327: 323: 319: 314: 313: 310: 306: 302: 298: 294: 290: 286: 285: 282: 278: 274: 270: 266: 262: 258: 254: 250: 246: 242: 239: 238: 232: 228: 225: 222: 218: 214: 210: 207: 204: 201: 198: 195: 192: 189: 186: 182: 179: 178:Find sources: 174: 171: 167: 161: 157: 153: 149: 144: 140: 135: 131: 127: 123: 119: 118: 114: 111: 108: 104: 101: 99: 96: 94: 91: 90: 89: 87: 82: 75: 72: 70: 69: 66: 64: 58: 51: 44: 42: 38: 33: 27: 26: 19: 799: 797: 757: 739: 714: 693: 676: 662:. Per Lupe. 659: 650: 641: 624: 596:undue weight 549: 537: 531:on sourcing 509: 480: 437: 404: 394: 385: 381: 343: 240: 226: 220: 212: 205: 199: 193: 187: 177: 79: 53: 49: 47: 31: 28: 592:these edits 203:free images 56:Malinaccier 586:Regarding 529:began work 261:it is true 259:, even if 253:WP:BADIDEA 804:talk page 538:Today, I 330:Shellwood 37:talk page 806:or in a 761:contribs 740:Comment: 648:is met. 646:WP:NLIST 540:did work 459:Jumpytoo 441:contribs 431:Jumpytoo 414:Jumpytoo 305:contribs 277:contribs 245:WP:NLIST 166:View log 107:glossary 39:or in a 779:4meter4 751:4meter4 727:4meter4 719:WP:FORK 702:Avilich 536:period. 209:WP refs 197:scholar 139:protect 134:history 84:New to 765:Cunard 717:. Per 715:Delete 696:Fails 694:Delete 681:Stifle 677:Delete 642:Delete 608:Cunard 551:Cunard 547:topic. 488:Cunard 445:Cunard 390:WP:ATA 382:Delete 344:Delete 241:Delete 181:Google 143:delete 50:delete 362:China 326:China 224:JSTOR 185:books 160:views 152:watch 148:links 16:< 783:talk 769:talk 755:talk 731:talk 706:talk 685:talk 668:talk 660:Keep 633:talk 629:Lupe 625:Keep 612:talk 578:talk 555:talk 523:per 492:talk 463:Talk 449:talk 435:talk 418:Talk 371:talk 352:talk 334:talk 324:and 301:talk 273:talk 217:FENS 191:news 156:logs 130:talk 126:edit 62:talk 398:• 386:why 307:) 279:) 231:TWL 164:– ( 785:) 771:) 733:) 708:) 687:) 670:) 635:) 614:) 606:. 580:) 557:) 494:) 479:." 451:) 373:) 354:) 336:) 328:. 303:/ 275:/ 267:. 211:) 168:| 158:| 154:| 150:| 146:| 141:| 137:| 132:| 128:| 781:( 767:( 758:· 753:( 729:( 725:. 704:( 683:( 666:( 631:( 610:( 576:( 572:. 553:( 490:( 447:( 438:· 433:( 369:( 350:( 332:( 299:( 271:( 235:) 227:· 221:· 213:· 206:· 200:· 194:· 188:· 183:( 175:( 172:) 162:) 124:( 109:) 105:( 65:) 59:(

Index

Knowledge:Articles for deletion
talk page
deletion review
Malinaccier
talk
21:28, 15 June 2022 (UTC)
List of people on the postage stamps of China

Articles for deletion
How to contribute
Introduction to deletion process
Guide to deletion
glossary
Help, my article got nominated for deletion!
List of people on the postage stamps of China
edit
talk
history
protect
delete
links
watch
logs
views
View log
edits since nomination
Google
books
news
scholar

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.