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 keep. Tone 14:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

1623 in philosophy[edit]

1623 in philosophy (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views) – (View log · Stats)

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

List with 1 entry » Shadowowl | talk 10:43, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Philosophy-related deletion discussions. CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 10:45, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep. Years in philosophy pages are not lists as such. SpinningSpark 11:52, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]
• Keep. The edits made by SpinningSpark suggest that this topic satisfies GNG and LISTN. If this page is not kept it should be merged to 17th century in philosophy (which is certainly notable due to entire books on the subject), like all the others, per ATD, PRESERVE and R. This AfD is not going to result in a deletion for the same reason that the nominations for 1007, 1073, 1142, 1270, 1316, 1347, 1433 and 1700 did not result in deletion. There should be no further nominations of these pages which should be either merged or expanded. We do not need an AfD to effect either of those outcomes. James500 (talk) 23:59, 14 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Ha ha, I missed all those others coming up. How many do you think could also be retrieved in the same way? SpinningSpark 11:30, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know. You will just have to look for sources and see what you can find. I can say with certainty that all years from 1876 onwards are notable because the periodical "Mind" was providing extensive news coverage of philosophy at that time. I can also say that the centuries in philosophy articles that have been created recently need to be kept, so in those cases it would be necessary to expand the redirect to produce a yearly article. Judging by the present state of the 1623 article, it would not surprise me if other years in the early modern period merited articles. A number of other pages have been merged including 1079, 1499, 1500, 1501, 1536, 1574, 1575 and 1600. I suspect that the best approach would be to start at the first missing year, 1898, and work backwards, one year at a time. James500 (talk) 21:38, 15 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Merge into 17th century in philosophy. I don't think the per-year lists from the 18th century and earlier will really have enough content to stand on their own, it looks like the per-century lists will. On the other hand, 1623 might be an exception, looking at how much Spinningspark has already expanded it. rchard2scout (talk) 20:29, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  I don't think 1623 is an exception. I have tried expanding two other pages previously at AfD, 1700 in philosophy and 1433 in philosophy, and got a similar amount of material. No special reason for choosing those years, they just happened to be the first ones I picked up. SpinningSpark 22:23, 16 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

• Keep – The article was significantly expanded by Spinningspark, thus making the nomination for deletion moot at this point. See also: WP:HEY. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 00:37, 21 September 2018 (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.