Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of nonagenarians
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
- 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. -- ( drini's vandalproof page ☎ ) 17:59, 26 November 2005 (UTC)
[edit] List of nonagenarians
listcruft. The encyclopaedic content of this article is covered in nonagenarian, and the rest is an arbitrary list. I can just about live with the list of people who hadn't died by the time they reached a hundred (which gets you a telegram from the Queen, so must be notable) but why 90? Is that even very unusual these days? Why leave them in when they die? Nonegenarians usually means living nonegenarians. It's pointless, I'd say. Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 20:56, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
- To whoever sees this Afd, does anyone remember Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of people who are nearly centenarians?? Any difference between this article's reason for Afd and that one's?? Georgia guy 21:42, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- LOL! That's a classic, that one! And yet, in a very real sense, you are absolutely spot on. That is, in effect, what this article is. And I nominated it for all the same reasons cited there. - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 22:01, 19 November 2005 (UTC)
Delete-I worked on this and have voted in favor of many lists so this might be a surprise. However even while working on it it struck me as kind of pointless. Living to 90 is increasingly not that odd, even for a celebrity. In my own family many of the people who lived to be elderly lived over 90 years. Passing a hundred is still interesting, but anyway delete.--T. Anthony 00:14, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
-
- That said if it could be limited to those rare cases where being a nonagenarian is remarkable I might, but probably would not, consider a keep. For example nonagenarians born with an often fatal disability or who were heroin addicts.--T. Anthony 00:30, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- Heh! When Stephen Hawking hits 90, I'll help you write it :-) - Just zis Guy, you know? [T]/[C] (W) AfD? 00:31, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
- That said if it could be limited to those rare cases where being a nonagenarian is remarkable I might, but probably would not, consider a keep. For example nonagenarians born with an often fatal disability or who were heroin addicts.--T. Anthony 00:30, 20 November 2005 (UTC)
Delete Listcruft
- 'delete as per nom Pete.Hurd 19:57, 22 November 2005 (UTC)
- Delete as per nom. MCB 02:00, 24 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.