The Economist Democracy Index (2019): In this case, this is simply a republishing of the statistics from the yearly report by the Economist Intelligence Unit, the pages are based on a single source, and people interested in this are better served reading that source, which has additional explanatory content of its own, for each year, so inclusion of these statistics individually does not serve an encyclopedic purpose; this is different from the example given in the policy where readers can compare different polls from different pollsters etc. (there is an encyclopedically interesting collation going on, and that is lacking here).  — Alalch E. 00:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Note:  This discussion has been included in the deletion sorting lists for the following topics: Politics , Social science ,  and Lists .  — Alalch E. 00:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete and REVDEL – these are clear copyright violations because they are all based on creative content invented and published by The Economist, which cannot be found or looked up anywhere else because they are a result of The Economist's proprietary index " based on 60 indicators, grouped into five categories: electoral process and pluralism, civil liberties, functioning of government, political participation and political culture ".  It is mass copyvio and should be WP:REVDELed .  Mathglot ( talk ) 09:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Actually, Afd is probably the wrong venue; the four pages should be hidden using {{ subst:copyvio }}, and then logged at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2024 July 19 , following the instructions at WP:CPN#Suspected or complicated infringement (that's the more conservative approach; I actually think it qualifies for speedy {{ db-g12 }} as blatant and obvious violation).  Mathglot ( talk ) 09:36, 17 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per nomination.  BottleOfChocolateMilk ( talk ) 20:08, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Delete per NOTSTATS; you mentioned that it is a copyright violation, it should otherwise been G12'ed rather than revdelling.  Toadette ( Let's discuss together! ) 20:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] I don't have the requisite URLs to fill out the db-g12 for 2020 and 2022, and by the time I find them the AfD will conclude as "delete".  See WP:DELREASON#2 for how copyright violations are the classic deletion reason, irrespective of process used.  If any admin wants to G12-delete all three remaining articles on their own accord, they're very welcome to.  I agree that revdel is pontless for an article that should be deleted and I only requested it to test Mathglot 's suggestion that it's needed.  @ Nthep : Hello and thank you for speedily deleting one of these pages.  Does revdelling play any role here?  — Alalch E. 22:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] See Special:Diff/1214461808 to understand why I did not just tag all four pages with G12 -- one editor has now actually removed the tag saying "Looks OK to me".  Which is exactly what I had expected would happen... — Alalch E. 06:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] @ Alalch E. I did revdel at first then realised there was nothing left, so G12'd the whole thing.  Nthep ( talk ) 07:47, 19 March 2024 (UTC) [ reply ] Comment The Economist Democracy Index (2019) has been speedied but the rest of the bundled nomination has not so I'm leaving this discussion open.  L iz Read!  Talk!  20:34, 19 March 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.

Discussion outcome: delete