Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Time spent reading

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. Malcolmxl5 (talk) 16:42, 27 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Time spent reading

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

Arbitrary article. Time spent reading is the amount of time people spend reading. I hardly think it warrants an article explaining that. ‡ Єl Cid of ᐺalencia ^ᐐT₳LKᐬ 12:54, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - this article is an arbitrary collection of information, failing to distinguish different ways in which one might use one's time reading (e.g. time spent reading online work, time spent reading fiction versus non-fiction, time spent reading newspapers, time spent reading magazines, and so on and so forth). Vorbee (talk) 13:42, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Education-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:31, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Social science-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 17:31, 13 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Very random collection indeed. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. -- Dane ^talk 19:17, 16 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 04:34, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Delete - Although the topic itself seems notable, and can be expanded with statistic, explanations, etc., current article definitely fits into WP:NOT#DICT, and deserves to be nuked. The article is almost devoid of content right now and I don't see it being of any sort of useful basis to expand on. tonyxc600 comms logs 16:37, 20 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Delete as per above. Not a reasonable stand-alone topic. power~enwiki (π, ν) 00:44, 26 September 2017 (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.