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 speedy keep. withdrawn by nominator, no other concerns DGG ( talk ) 04:54, 24 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of sovereign states by formation date[edit]

List of sovereign states by formation date (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log • AfD statistics)

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

This page has multiple issues. WP:OR, and WP:NPOV are tagged on the page, but the main reason for this proposal is the lack of citations and sources. It does not even include all states on the List of Sovereign States, specifically States with limited recognition. On top of all this, the page is hopelessly out of date (one example, the first line says Kosovo is a proposed state). The page also appears to have hidden paragraphs within it. Desperately requires a clean up, and is unencyclopedic. I do not feel this page is salvageable, as it is, at this stage. Unless things change, it should be deleted (I would not oppose it being recreated from sratch afterward though). Outback the koala (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep And close. AfD is not cleanup. This list has a clear setout criteria and just needs some work putting into it. Who knows, it could become a featured list. The nominator should also read WP:UNENCYC, WP:RUBBISH and WP:NOEFFORT Lugnuts (talk) 18:35, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. I see what you mean, I've already started some improvements, but it will be alot of work. I honestly don't know how to close this debate though. Hopefully an admin will come along and close this for me. Outback the koala (talk) 06:50, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. If you're happy to withdraw the nomination, just say so and it can be closed. Lugnuts (talk) 13:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I wish it so. I would rather work to improve the article, rather than have this discussion stay open. Outback the koala (talk) 18:12, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep Part of the function of Wikipedia is to serve as an almanac, and this list if nothing else serves that function. The dates of independence, sovereignty, last foreign occupation, etc seem quite encyclopedic, and the list is the sort one expects to find in an almanac or encyclopedia. Deletion is not a substitute for updating, if some entries need an update. Edison (talk) 21:19, 22 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Note: This debate has been included in the list of Lists-related deletion discussions. -- • Gene93k (talk) 00:32, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep as per the 2 above. The Ogre (talk) 18:34, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I know! I now agree, But I don't know how to close the discussion... Outback the koala (talk) 18:49, 23 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I just did it for you. DGG ( talk ) 04:55, 24 February 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.