Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of Holocaust victims

This page is an archive of the discussion about the proposed deletion of the article below. This page is no longer live. Further comments should be made on the article's talk page rather than here so that this page is preserved as an historic record.
The result of the debate was - no consensus, unquestionably should be confined to only "notable" victims. - SimonP 02:10, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of Holocaust victims

This would seem to be a rather ambitious list. - BanyanTree 02:19, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

• Six million people? Yeah, that list is gonna be complete. Delete. Mike H 02:24, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
  • There were definitely more than six million people killed in the Holocaust..try 16 million Stancel 01:15, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• "This list is incomplete; you can help by expanding it." No kidding. Delete. Eric119 02:50, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• As much as I'd like to see this.... this article would be finished sometime in the next century. Delete. --Chanting Fox 02:52, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep. Even if it is never complete, it will still be a list of Holocaust victims. And who knows perhaps it will be completed eventually. If there were only ten victims wouldn't we keep it? Does the fact that there are millions make it less worthy of keeping or more?--Heathcliff 03:16, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

  I oppose changing the title of this article to List of famous Holocaust victims because then we'd have fights over who was famous enough to be listed among the Holocaust victims and that would just be sad. If the name is changed, change my vote to delete.--Heathcliff 23:26, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

  You should probably strike out your vote above, then. In any case, if you apply the simple criterion of only listing those people with Wikipedia articles, then you've got a simple yardstick right there. --Calton | Talk 04:43, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

  My vote is still keep (as it is). My vote only changes to delete if the title is changed to List of notable Holocaust victims. However, I don't mind changing the title to List of Holocaust victims with articles on Wikipedia which is why I suggested it as a compromise further down. I don't think that we should call it list of List of notable Holocaust victims and say that inclusion in Wikipedia is the test for inclusion because without it clearly spelled out in the articles title it will be imposible to enforce the standard.--Heathcliff 12:17, 20 May 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Just a tad ambitious. Seems to me this would be better off in m:Wikimorial, if it ever starts, or its own Wiki. android↔talk 03:33, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Just a tad ambitious. Seems to me this would be better off in m:Wikimorial, if it ever starts, or its own Wiki. android↔talk 03:33, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, assuming that the list (like many others on Wikipedia) will be limited to notable cases. -- BD2412 ^thimkact 03:44, 2005 May 17 (UTC)
  • This sounds like a good alternative to deletion, though a rename would be in order to reflect the fact that it isn't a complete list. android↔talk 03:51, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
    • Not necessarily, if the condition is spelled out atop the page. See List of slave owners. -- BD2412 ^thimkact 04:17, 2005 May 17 (UTC)
      • The criteria on that page is "This list includes notable individuals for which there is a consensus of evidence of slave ownership." The first part of which "This list includes notable individuals" merely restates what the title of article already says, and the second of which "for which there is a consensus of evidence of slave ownership" results as a natural consequence of the Wikipedia process (in there's no conscenss it's probally going to be edited out.) If the standard "List of Holocaust victims with articles in Wikipedia" was put at the top of the page it would likely be ignored or even more likely edited out by those who did not like the standard. That is, the question of what the standard is will be left to future editors if it is not in the title. Which is no different than changing the name to "List of Holocaust victims" and not adding a standard to the top of the page.--Heathcliff 12:27, 20 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Verifying every entry on a list this large would be an endless task, and it would never be accurate. I'm not even talking about completeness. I mean the list would contain entries that are wrong, and WP would not be able fix them. False information that can't be fixed is unacceptable in an encyclopedia. If this information is desired, create a category for it and use it on the bio pages of notable victims. Quale 04:21, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Delete. Well thought out and well said. I was going to vote keep until I read this, but this is the way to go. Andrewa 06:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• I'd rather have the link changed to List of famous Holocaust victimsSYSS Mouse 04:34, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, unmaintainable list. Megan1967 04:48, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete for the reasons listed by Quale. JeremyA 04:51, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Perhaps it should be list of notable Holocaust victims.Keep and rename. Capitalistroadster 04:57, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. excellent reasoning by Quale. --Unfocused 06:09, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• I'm really torn on this one - it's a noble attempt, but surely destined to fall short. Might I suggest replacement with two worthwhile lists - List of notable Holocaust victims and List of notable Holocaust survivors, the latter for those who were in the camps but made it through unscathed alive? Grutness...wha? 09:15, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

I'd prefer doing this, and keeping. Nateji77 11:29, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

• Delete Unless all the Holocaust Victims are mentioned .

an attempt at a complete list of holocaust victims and survivors, rather than simply the notable individuals amongst them, sounds like it belongs in wikisource. Nateji77 11:29, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

• Keep but ONLY if changed to "List of notable Holocaust victims". Wikipedia is not paper, but attempting to list 60 million people simply is unattainable. However a list of famous people who died in the Holocaust would be of interest. Perhaps this might work better as a category. Question: assuming that Holocaust victims were primarily Jewish, what's a Catholic saint doing listed here? I think an introduction needs to be added to explain this for those who think only Jews died in the Holocaust. 23skidoo 13:08, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

either you're off by an order of magnitude, or the article at The Holocaust is. it says 6 million (admittedly, still a lot, but look at pi entries in wikisource). Nateji77 13:22, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

• Strong Delete- no way to ensure that it is accurate (exact number of Holocaust victims is not known, and varies wildly between sources). Creating a list of 'notable' Holocaust victims would be abhorrent- it would imply that some victims were more important (ie others deserved to die more) just because of their 'celebrity' status--Cynical 13:20, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - Agree with above that a article named "notable Holocaust victims" is a bad idea. However, a category for Holocaust Victims would serve the same purpouse and not have any ugly connotations (if a bio exists, it's pretty obvious and verifiable if it belongs) same logic should probably apply to other possible "lists" (9/11 victims, WWII Veterans, etc.) 66.94.94.154 14:52, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
  • Ok, then we need a Cat Holocaust victems. Klonimus 02:52, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, WP:NOT a memorial. Radiant_* 14:56, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete When Stalin said a million deaths is a statistic, I don't think this is what he meant. Extremely difficult to verify, problematic notability (the event was notable, does that mean every person involved was?) --InShaneee 14:59, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. As noble as the idea is, I think we'd be stepping on a landmine on this one. I don't see a problem with a list of notable victims, but an outright list is best left to other organizations that can do a better job of it. --Mitsukai 15:00, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

• Delete: First, on of the things that Wikipedia Is Not is a memorial site. We have Wikimemorial for lists of this nature (all the 9/11 victims, e.g.), and we must reject, out of hand and a priori, any eulogy/elegy. Secondly, because the list is impossible to verify, the list fails on that score. Third, because the list cannot be completed, any inclusion is inherently POV (e.g. the list may bias toward ethnic victims as opposed to political ones, or sexual ones opposed to nationalist ones). The main reason, however, is simply that we are not a memorial. Geogre 15:10, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep and rename. I think the word 'notable' is unfortunate - weren't they all? 'Famous' is much more neutral. The criterion for inclusion is simple: if someone has a Wikipedia entry (or should have one), they ought to be included, otherwise not. Eixo 16:17, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete Wikipedia is not a memorial; the existing Category:Holocaust victims and subcategories should suffice for those victims that otherwise merit an article. CDC (talk) 18:41, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Stancel 19:23, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. This is what categories are for. -R. fiend 20:38, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as a list of famous holocaust victims in conjunction with the above-mentioned categories. Only mention people who'd be famous/notable enough for an article of their own. Mgm|^(talk) 21:15, May 17, 2005 (UTC)
• Separate into smaller lists: Dutch Holocaust victims, German Holocaust victims, French, Danish, Polish, etc. One massive list of all Holocaust victims would be impossible and unworkable. Aecis 22:25, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Attempting to determine who "deserves" to be on this list is POV. RickK 22:50, May 17, 2005 (UTC)

• Is it POV trying to determine who deserves to be on Wikipedia? Eixo 23:48, 17 May 2005 (UTC)

No, but it is POV if you deem some Holocaust victims notable and therefore Wikipediable and others unnotable and therefore not Wikipediable. There should be no distinguishing between notable Holocaust victims and unnotable Holocaust victims. If you make a list of Holocaust victims, you should include all Holocaust victims. And if some Holocaust victims are indeed notable, they should be on Wikipedia because they're notable, not because they're notable Holocaust victims. Aecis 08:06, 18 May 2005 (UTC)

• That's exactly why I made the point that the word 'notable' should be avoided in the namespace; because it might seem offensive. However, there are already criteria in Wikipedia on who are notable and who are not, and there are innumerable lists based on these criteria. There is no reason why information on well-known people who were killed by the Nazis during the war should be suppressed. Eixo 03:36, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

• Um, if a person has -- and deserves -- an article on Wikipedia then they're a priori notable --Calton | Talk 04:24, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

• My point exactly. Eixo 05:11, 19 May 2005 (UTC)

• Delete. Not maintainable; Wikipedia is not a memorial --Carnildo 23:35, 17 May 2005 (UTC)
  • You were saying? Aecis 08:06, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I am tired of seeing lists which cover such large scopes of mostly uninteresting things or people that will almost certainly never been completed. Kelly Martin 00:55, May 18, 2005 (UTC)
• Keep Yad Vashem is compliling such a list. We should have one also. Klonimus 02:49, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, maintainable as long as we limit it to victims notable for other reasons than being murder victims. I don't think the creators intended this to be a list of 6 million + names. Perhaps a retitling, per MacGyverMagic, is in order. Sjakkalle 08:50, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep as list of notable victims, i.e. only include those who are notable enough to have a Wikipedia page about them. Darksun 11:39, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Another un-maintainable list. If you want to group all people who were Holocaust victims and have a Wikipedia page about them, that's what Categories are for. Jayjg ^(talk) 21:32, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• I strongly oppose having an aticle called "List of notable Holocaust victims". As someone else said they are all notable. I also think it would lead to very sensitive disputes over who was notable and who was not. So I propose that if the list is kept but the name is changed that it should be change to "List of Holocaust victims with articles in Wikipedia", and that it should provide links to all of those articles.--Heathcliff 23:09, 18 May 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: With all due respect, I think this discussion is getting silly. There's a page called List of Norwegians. This is not a list of all 4,5 million of them. This was never meant to be a list of all 4,5 million of them! It's implicit in the title that the list only covers notable individuals. As I said, the word 'notable' ought to be avoided, but apart from that the list is completely viable. Eixo 02:45, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
• With its current title, it's by definition a list that is impractical to the extreme. Change to List of notable Holocaust victims -- and no, I don't buy for one second the claim that attaching a notability limitation would give rise to unresolvable disputes, because the criterion should be simple - whether the person has an article on Wikipedia. What WOULD give rise to disputes would be restricting entry to those who have articles on Wikipedia BUT leaving the title alone, since that would likely confuse new editors trying to add names and leave others with the unpleasant chore of deleting the names of some user's grandmother or great-uncle who fail to met the non-explicit criterion. --Calton | Talk 04:24, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
• Strong keep if limited to notable figures. Delete otherwise. Gamaliel 04:47, 19 May 2005 (UTC)
• Strong delete. Sholtar 04:48, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. A noble aim, but this would be a project that would be impossible to verify and maintain. Harro5 10:26, May 19, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - Doesn't belong here even if it was possible to Complete. --Irishpunktom\^talk 14:45, May 20, 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Not viable. I have bad experience with such open-ended lists - they grow and grow and grow until they get unusable. Pavel Vozenilek 01:20, 21 May 2005 (UTC)
• Keep, but confine it to victims with and deserving of articles. - SimonP 02:10, May 23, 2005 (UTC)

This page is now preserved as an archive of the debate and, like some other VfD subpages, is no longer 'live'. Subsequent comments on the issue, the deletion, or the decision-making process should be placed on the relevant 'live' pages. Please do not edit this page.