Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of white people

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. – Robert ^{T | @ | C} 00:52, 29 November 2005 (UTC)

[edit] List of white people

Unmaintainable listcruft. —Ilmari Karonen (talk) 20:09, 23 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per nom, and probably WP:POINT —Wahoofive (talk) 20:16, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. WTF? 1) This looks like some serious piece of racism, 2) When kept, the title should be changed, since roughly 2 billion people (correct me if I'm wrong) on Earth are white, 3) Per nom.: unmaintainable listcruft. Nazgjunk - - Signing is ^{for Whimps} 20:47, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
  • The naming convention is "List of X", not "list of famous X". Kappa 00:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per nom and Nazgjunk. Paolo Liberatore (Talk) 20:55, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete per reasons above. PJM 21:16, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
• Abstain. There are many lists of various people. Perhaps rename to list of very famous Caucasians, or something.? --Andrew 21:19, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete would be far too long. --TimPope 21:20, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
• Comment If List of Native Americans and List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people is to be kept, then why isn't a list on white people allowed to be kept? Are we just too PC to allow silly lists on ethnic minorities and lifestyle choices to be kept yet famous white straight people can't get their own list? Barmy! --Bob 21:55, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
  • Comment: There's no need for a list of straight people or a list of white people; those are the default assumptions that are automatically made about people in the absence of specific information to the contrary. As such, there's just no remotely valid reason to notarize "people who aren't part of any minority group" as if that somehow constituted an encyclopedic topic in its own right. Bearcat 23:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Speak for yourself but I think making any such assumptions is racist in itself. SD6-Agent 04:05, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
    • Straight people are a majority, so that is a fair default assumption. Caucasian people are not a majority, not even close. Kappa 00:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

There is as much a need to list straight white people as there is a need to list gay and colored people. --Bob 01:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

• No, there is less need to list straight people because the majority of people are straight. The majority of people are not white. Kappa 03:11, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

In the world overall, you're right, but Wikipedia does not categorize people that way. Wikipedia uses country-specific groupings such as African-American, so minority vs. majority status is defined by one's country-specific context. Conversely, a list of white Jamaicans could potentially be valid, since they're the minority there, but there's absolutely no need for a list of white Canadians since whites are the majority in Canada. It's defined at the level of the country. Bearcat 19:02, 24 November 2005 (UTC)

• Delete per WP:POINT and WP:Please! no more f***ing listcruft! Just zis  Guy, you know? ^[T]/_[C] (W) AfD? 22:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. I object strongly to the racist term "white": like most so-called "white" people I am a person of colour, since my skin is not white, but a slightly yellowish pink. I also object to the racist term "caucasian", which is as bad as using "African" for all so-called Black people: I have never so much as visited the Caucasus, and feel no ancestral affinity with its people. Oh, and delete List of Native Americans and List of gay, lesbian or bisexual people too. Delete 'em all and let God categories sort 'em out. — Haeleth Talk 23:03, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Unnecessary and virtually unmaintainable. Also utterly absurd. And WP:POINT. Bearcat 23:34, 23 November 2005 (UTC)
• keep, users should be able to find examples of notable Caucasians, same as any other ethnic grouping. It isn't unmaintainable since people don't change their ethnic group very often. Kappa 00:42, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete - I wouldn't want to be the one who decides who's important enough to be part of the List of white people elect. Barneyboo 00:44, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
  • I don't enjoy voting on who gets to be in wikipedia either, but I don't want to delete the whole thing. Kappa 00:51, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as overbroad. Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 03:08, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete-Because we have lists of every kind of European or European American possible. Except maybe List of Ruthenians--T. Anthony 03:18, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete, created as a backlash to the keep votes on lists of ethnic people. Censure creator. User:Zoe|^(talk) 04:25, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as WP:Complete Bollocks. Eddie.willers 05:50, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Hopelessly, hopelessly unmaintainable. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 06:24, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. The list would be subject to constant "Who is white?" wars; based on the infinite regional, national, governmental, and social definitions of white. Al-Andalus 06:49, 24 November 2005 (UTC).
• Delete. I support lists of any ethnic subgroup within this heading. Few people other than white supremacists identify themselves as generically "white." The title is inherently POV and the subject is too broad to rename. Durova 07:39, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete. Potentially endless list of non-notables. Good grief. ➨ ❝REDVERS❞ 20:49, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete as obvious WP:POINT. Turnstep 20:53, 24 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete or Rename to FAMOUS White People and Keep —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sethie (talk • contribs) 01:23, 25 November 2005 (UTC).
• Delete as listcruft in its worst --Jaranda(^{watz sup}) 19:34, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete my favorite so far!! StabRule 23:36, 27 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete it's just to broad to be meaningful. Seano1 00:50, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
• Delete only on the grounds that this is unmaintainable. I don't really understand the logic of deleting this lists and not other similar ones. Besides that they're unmaintainable, I don't see how anyone could possilbly ever use them. That said, the only reasons I've seen for deleting this list but keeping other similar ones have been based in racism and nationalism. Highly un-wiki, I should think. Theshibboleth 08:12, 28 November 2005 (UTC)

My reason was pretty much that we have lists of about every European nationality and kind of European American. There's a List of Finnish Americans and a List of Faroese people just to name a few. Also I don't think there is a List of black people or a List of red people. In fact I think that second would be offensive.--T. Anthony 15:41, 28 November 2005 (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.