Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Index of architecture articles Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Index_of_architecture_articles

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.  Sandstein  22:19, 2 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Index of architecture articles (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log)

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

Following a recent discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Architecture#Expert needed I am nominating this for deletion as members of the WikiProject seem to agree that this index is not useful. As it stands the index contains only a small and haphazard fraction of architecture related articles (ca. 1,200 of 22,000), and is rather confusing than helpful (barely notable items included while highly notable ones left out). There doesn't seem practicable to maintain an index of such a broad scope and the very low number of views indicates that interest is also very limited. The view is that Outline of architecture and Category:Architecture are more useful, and this index does not add anything significant to them. Elekhh (talk) 21:41, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Architecture-related deletion discussions. --Elekhh (talk) 21:55, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete A list of 22,000 articles would not be useful, and less would be something else than what the title promises. Borock (talk) 22:34, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]
• Delete As per discussion, there seem to be better ways nowadays of keeping track of Architecture articles. Sionk (talk) 23:13, 25 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 15:04, 26 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

• Delete Agree, in fact I think I proposed deletion in the first place. ProfDEH (talk) 08:17, 31 January 2012 (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.