Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Wikipedia article traffic

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 Move to Wikipedia:Wikipedia article traffic. There is no consensus on whether the mainspace-to-WPspace redirect should be created or not, so I'll leave it for now and ask people to contest its existence at WP:RFD Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 08:32, 1 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia article traffic

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

Previously, I deleted OR and poorly sourced material in this article. The scant remaining material is unsourced, and also appears to be OR. Better treatments of this topic include WP:STAT, WP:ATJ, and WP:MILE.

However, the page has averaged 15 views per day over the past three months. Would it be inappropriate to convert it to a disambig page (or redirect) that points to the WP namespace? Should we just delete? Ringbang (talk) 14:33, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move to Wikipedia:Wikipedia article traffic and delete the cross-namespace redirect left behind. KATMAKROFAN (talk) 14:45, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Despite being a co-writer of the WP:TOP25 and Signpost Traffic Report, and a popular 2013 Special Report on Wikipedia traffic, I never knew this article existed. Some form of it may be appropriate with a Wikipedia-prefix, unless we have sources.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 23:27, 23 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Milowent: WP:Article traffic jumps is the most likely place. Each of the article's seven graphs (which are screenshots of stats.grok.se) illustrates a temporary traffic jump. Since Chelyabinsk meteor is the only one that's already documented on WP:ATJ, we could confirm the stats, add any to the list that are deemed historically relevant, and write blurbs for them. But do we ever redirect from mainspace to WP? —Ringbang (talk) 03:02, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Ringbang: I like that suggestion, and there is some precedent for it, e.g., List of online newspaper archives was redirected to Wikipedia:List of online newspaper archives a few years ago.--Milowent • ^hasspoken 10:16, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, great. If there are no objections, I can take-on that task. —Ringbang (talk) 00:40, 26 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Websites-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:26, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Internet-related deletion discussions. North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 09:26, 24 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move as suggested to wikispace. Bearian (talk) 20:54, 29 September 2016 (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.