Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of real-life characters

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 of the debate was delete. Sango123 19:22, 27 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] List of real-life characters

This list has been around for several years, but its definition and purpose seem vaguely defined. While I suppose I grasp that this is a list of "famous public personae", I question the need for a list of this sort, and whether it is encyclopedic in nature. I can't really decide where I think this information belongs, but I don't think it merits its own article -- and I certainly don't think it deserves this article, which is sparse, confusing, disjointed, and unmaintainable as written. Delete as unencyclopedic. Xoloz 03:57, 21 June 2006 (UTC)

• Delete Indiscriminate. Same for List of borderline fictional characters ~ trialsanderrors 07:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete Well for a kickoff, the title surely falls under indiscriminate information - an inherently unmaintainable list. In addition, the article itself is extremely garbled and confusingly-written, and the list itself is arguably inaccurate. For example, Marilyn Manson and Alice Cooper aren't "characters", they're pseudonyms. It strikes me that such a debate could arise over any number of potential subjects in this article. There's just far too much ambiguity - Ziggy Stardust is surely just a fictional character? Alan Partridge is a fictional character who sometimes interacts with "real" people - should he go in there? Completely unmaintainable, far too much possibility for debate over what should and shouldn't qualify, and therefore it's just not Wikipedia-fodder. Seb Patrick 10:09, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete, fails Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information. --Coredesat 10:14, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete. Indiscriminate list that provides zero context. In some circles, that's known as listcruft. Deizio talk 13:32, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete This /has/ been around for a while and remains a purely irrelevent list of barely well defined reasonable content. It is listcruft of the most pointless kind doktorb | words 20:41, 21 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete --->|Newyorktimescrossword 21:59, 21 June 2006 (UTC)|
• Delete. This is pointless, and a category will do just fine for most of the entries. Crypticfirefly 02:02, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per Crypticfirefly Anonymous__Anonymous 17:14, 22 June 2006 (UTC)
• Delete per nom; indiscriminate collection of pseudonyms, real people and fictional characters. Angus McLellan (Talk) 18:03, 22 June 2006 (UTC)

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.